Howdy, Stranger!

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

Punters rate Trump as a 23.8% chance to win WH2024 – politicalbetting.com

135678

Comments

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Farooq said:

    darkage said:

    I get a sense with Trump that people don't believe it will happen because it is unthinkable and then - as a result - the betting doesn't price the situation correctly. I think that is happening here.

    I think it is realistic that he would win in 2024 and, whilst not ideal, I don't think it would be a total disaster; we would just need to get on with it, as we did last time.

    People are so hysterical about Trump, you could imagine him winning the election and there being a serious attempt to prevent him taking office again.
    He's a sexual abuser and he tried to stop the democratic election from playing out last time. Any concerns people have about him are well-founded and fall very far short of the label "hysterical" being applicable.

    If you can't be alarmed about a pussy-grabbing, election-interfering, white nationalist madman being elected, is there anything you can be alarmed at?
    It's amazing isn't it. Trump coming back is just objectively a grim and scary prospect. I cannot understand how anyone in their right mind who pays any attention to this can feel otherwise.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,129
    Eurovision sucks ass for not letting Zelensky speak, say Sunak and Starmer
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,239

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    Worth noting that Carter himself only won in the first place in large part because he was up against the unelected, bumbling Ford.

    Of course, Trump was himself another exception.
    Gerald Ford did NOT lose in 1976 due to being non-elected or bumbling, though these were NOT pluses.

    Rather, he lost due to Watergate, as exacerbated by his pardoning Richard Nixon author and "unindicted coconspirator" of Watergate.

    Jerry Ford had a challenging presidency (including now forgotten pandemic) with many a misstep forced and unforced, political and personal. However, at end of 1976 campaign he was gaining on Jimmy Carter, due to doubts about "Jimmy Who?" and (dare I say) swingback.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,183
    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    This is either meaningless or stupid.
    Presumably teachers, shop assistants, garage mechanics etc are jot going to be given the right to work from home.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 4,746
    edited May 2023
    kinabalu said:

    darkage said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    Yes, possibly more,

    I think @darkage has a very good point in that, because people don't want him to win and think he is so awful, it is skewing the betting. It happened in 2016. I got 6/1 on both Brexit and Trump on the days of both votes, which is crazy when you think both were two horse races and what the opinion polls were stating.

    I still very much think there is value in a Trump-RDS bet. RDS has not only blown his chances for 2024 but potentially for 2028. Even if he did consider running then, his performance this time will have emboldened other GOP names to throw their hat in the ring for next time. If RDS wants to be President, his best bet is to get himself nominated as Trump's VP pick.
    No it's the other way. People are overstating the chances of what they fear happening. They are also not processing the big picture properly. Trump's WH24 chances are nothing like current odds imply. It's a lay.
    It seems like the same dynamics brewing up again as 2016, but it could of course work out in a different way this time.

    I think he will get the nomination, and all these court cases etc help him with that... but it is less likely that he will win the actual vote - he is quite an off putting character. What is he offering to democrat leaning voters?
    Or to anyone beyond the MAGA base + GOP habituals. He'd have won in 2020 if he could have been just a little bit not himself but it was beyond him. And he's sunk even deeper into his own world now.

    2016? Ok but I don't see too big a similarity. Joe Biden isn't HRC and in 2016 Trump was an insurgent newcomer to politics whereas now he's a known quantity and most of what is known is negative to most people.
    It suppose it all goes down to how annoyed people are with the current government in a years time. Strange developments could also take place in the culture wars.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    An unknown from 2020 is how much covid had an effect on driving up the turnout for Biden.
    I would also point out that Covid usually boosted incumbents (see Johnson, B).
    The moment when the second winter wave was upon us and vaccines hadn't yet arrived wasn't a great time for incumbents.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,973
    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    The post April cost rises now feeding through into voting intention? Lots of angry voters out there
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771
    edited May 2023
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    An unknown from 2020 is how much covid had an effect on driving up the turnout for Biden.
    I think Trump was the major factor driving up turnout for Biden.

    I think the best case against Trump in 2024, was that the closer he was to a candidate in 2022, the worse they did.

    Take Kari Lake. She was Trump's biggest fan, and she repeated his talking points ad nauseum.

    Arizona, a purple state, in the midterms, with a charisma free Democratic candidate who refused to debate should have been an easy Republican hold. And indeed, the Republicans won six of the nine Congressional Districts, usually fairly comfortably.

    But Ms Lake trailed Republican Congressional candidates by 4 to 9 points in every district. The voters said "yes, we want Republicans, but we don't want the batshit crazy Trump ones."
    Here's the Arizona Congressional results:



    And here's the Governor's race:



    The Democrats got almost 30% more votes when facing a Trump backed candidate, then when facing a generic Republican. While the Republicans got fewer votes.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    Worth noting that Carter himself only won in the first place in large part because he was up against the unelected, bumbling Ford.

    Of course, Trump was himself another exception.
    Gerald Ford did NOT lose in 1976 due to being non-elected or bumbling, though these were NOT pluses.

    Rather, he lost due to Watergate, as exacerbated by his pardoning Richard Nixon author and "unindicted coconspirator" of Watergate.

    Jerry Ford had a challenging presidency (including now forgotten pandemic) with many a misstep forced and unforced, political and personal. However, at end of 1976 campaign he was gaining on Jimmy Carter, due to doubts about "Jimmy Who?" and (dare I say) swingback.
    I think you give several examples there of bumblingness.

    Ford was indeed gaining on Carter by polling day 1976 - having been 30 points behind at one stage - but his 'not pluses' were probably enough to tip the difference. (I'd tie in his unelectedness with his handling of Watergate)

    More crucially, he was largely nominated because he was the incumbent. Put another way, would he have beaten Reagan in a primary fight were he not the sitting president? Almost certainly not. And would Carter have beaten Reagan in an open contest? Equally, very probably no (assuming Carter got that far, with a different primary dynamic). Put simply, Carter was in no small way an accidental president, and a Watergate legacy, notwithstanding his skill in gaining the nomination in the first place. Normality only really resumed in 1980.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 2,004
    edited May 2023
    Russia claiming a strike today in Luhansk was from Storm Shadow. If true, then Ukraine are putting their new resources to immediate use.

    ⚡️⚡️🇷🇺Russian propaganda reports that the strike was carried out by a 🇬🇧British-🇫🇷French Storm Shadow cruise missile
    https://twitter.com/front_ukrainian/status/1657049636014571521

    Edit: Luhansk is well outside HIMARS range.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    Wow. I'll give you tons better than that. I'll lay you @ 11/4 if you want.

    Your 4 against my 11. Do you have 4 of anything you can spare for when you lose?
    As so often you’re the one talking sense on this. He’s having to pay compensation to a woman he sexually assaulted, and that will allow him to win over the floating voters he would need? Poppycock!
    Thank you! People really are doing too much tree and not enough wood on this one. I've rarely seen a worse 11/4 bet.

    #unelectabletrump
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,920
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    An unknown from 2020 is how much covid had an effect on driving up the turnout for Biden.
    I think Trump was the major factor driving up turnout for Biden.

    I think the best case against Trump in 2024, was that the closer he was to a candidate in 2022, the worse they did.

    Take Kari Lake. She was Trump's biggest fan, and she repeated his talking points ad nauseum.

    Arizona, a purple state, in the midterms, with a charisma free Democratic candidate who refused to debate should have been an easy Republican hold. And indeed, the Republicans won six of the nine Congressional Districts, usually fairly comfortably.

    But Ms Lake trailed Republican Congressional candidates by 4 to 9 points in every district. The voters said "yes, we want Republicans, but we don't want the batshit crazy Trump ones."
    Here's the Arizona Congressional results:



    And here's the Governor's race:



    The Democrats got almost 30% more votes when facing a Trump backed candidate, then when facing a generic Republican. While the Republicans got fewer votes.
    And yet, despite this evidence of toxicity you seem to be suggesting that the chances of the man himself winning in 2024 are understated?
  • DialupDialup Posts: 561
    The easy way to figure out if Labour is going to go up in the polls is to listen to what Novara Media say.

    They said Starmer is the most untrustworthy man in British politics and stands for nothing. Abandoning his pledges they say will make him unpopular with voters.

    Week after, Labour hits 27% lead.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    It’s hard to see anyone but Trump getting the nom, and it’s hard to see Biden losing to him.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,087
    Cookie said:

    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    This is either meaningless or stupid.
    Presumably teachers, shop assistants, garage mechanics etc are jot going to be given the right to work from home.
    Bear in mind that we're getting the Telegraph's take on a leak, which may not be the entire story...

    If it's like the right to (request) part time work, there will be a "unless the job requires it" clause. It would be crazy otherwise. (Though if we take teachers, a model where they have to be in school for lessons but not if they don't have a class ought to be within the wit of man to plan.)

    And then we come back to quality of staff, management and systems. If you have the right staff, the work will still get done- even if they take 15 minutes out to collect a child from school, like I have just done. If you have the right management, they will be making sure the work is done well; that's their job. And yes, that will include spending on equipment and systems.

    But you need all that anyway. The idea that you can take unmotivated staff, mediocre managers and shlonky systems and make it function by putting it all in an office is for the birds. Besides- smart employers are dangling some WFH as a benefit of working for them; it's something employees appreciate. So if you don't want to offer that (lots of vacancies, remember), what do you offer instead?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    The UK is currently trialling an innovative combination of building no homes, opening the borders, raising taxes, and letting public services rot.

    The party which has done this is then going to ask a coalition of social conservatives and free marketeers to vote for it next year.


    https://twitter.com/sashworthhayes/status/1656959143729590272?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 4,746

    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    Otherwise known as the right to pick kids up from school, take dog for a walk, wash car, and get paid for it.
    In my experience this attitude is rapidly dying out; managers who think this way will become obsolete, in large parts of the workforce at least. It is better to accept that this is the new reality and adapt to it.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    I think both Biden and Trump are underpriced: it's hard to see any other nominees, and while Biden should be favorite, he should be a relatively narrow one.
    Yes, I think that is spot-on.
    Nooo, it's spot OFF as regards Trump. He's too short. 3.75 to regain the WH? C'mon!
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    I think both Biden and Trump are underpriced: it's hard to see any other nominees, and while Biden should be favorite, he should be a relatively narrow one.
    Yes, I think that is spot-on.
    Nooo, it's spot OFF as regards Trump. He's too short. 3.75 to regain the WH? C'mon!
    How confident are you that US republican primary voters are as rational as you are?
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    An unknown from 2020 is how much covid had an effect on driving up the turnout for Biden.
    I think Trump was the major factor driving up turnout for Biden.

    I think the best case against Trump in 2024, was that the closer he was to a candidate in 2022, the worse they did.

    Take Kari Lake. She was Trump's biggest fan, and she repeated his talking points ad nauseum.

    Arizona, a purple state, in the midterms, with a charisma free Democratic candidate who refused to debate should have been an easy Republican hold. And indeed, the Republicans won six of the nine Congressional Districts, usually fairly comfortably.

    But Ms Lake trailed Republican Congressional candidates by 4 to 9 points in every district. The voters said "yes, we want Republicans, but we don't want the batshit crazy Trump ones."
    Here's the Arizona Congressional results:



    And here's the Governor's race:



    The Democrats got almost 30% more votes when facing a Trump backed candidate, then when facing a generic Republican. While the Republicans got fewer votes.
    I don't think it is as clear cut as that.

    Yes, in Arizona, the Governorship should have been a GOP hold. But Lake was / is extreme. Turnout was down over 2% over the previous election. And the GOP gains in the House in AZ were helped by redistricting,

    However, it's more the case when you look at other elections. Take Colorado. Jon O'Dea - the GOP candidate for Senator - was supposed to be the shining example of a moderate GOP, non-Trump aligned candidate who would pose a threat to Bennett who was seen as uninspiring. But O'Dea lost by over 14 points.

    Contrast that with the NY Governorship race. Lee Zeldin was very much a Trump-favourite candidate and running in.a very blue state, However, he came very close to causing a major upset in taking the Governorship and it is generally acknowledged his campaign helped the GOP win four House seats in the state (and lead to the bizarre situation, as someone put it, that the Democrat majority in the NY Senate race was less than the one in Colorado).

    What particularly marked out the Trump-aligned GOP candidates who underperformed was their generally whacko personalities.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,920
    AlistairM said:

    Russia claiming a strike today in Luhansk was from Storm Shadow. If true, then Ukraine are putting their new resources to immediate use.

    ⚡️⚡️🇷🇺Russian propaganda reports that the strike was carried out by a 🇬🇧British-🇫🇷French Storm Shadow cruise missile
    https://twitter.com/front_ukrainian/status/1657049636014571521

    Edit: Luhansk is well outside HIMARS range.

    The news from Bakhmut today sounds quite encouraging. Vlad should make sure he’s not standing too close to any windows above ground level.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    edited May 2023
    darkage said:

    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    Otherwise known as the right to pick kids up from school, take dog for a walk, wash car, and get paid for it.
    In my experience this attitude is rapidly dying out; managers who think this way will become obsolete, in large parts of the workforce at least. It is better to accept that this is the new reality and adapt to it.

    Working full time, Monday to Friday, in the office is dead.

    For those who have to go in (teachers and the like) I wonder whether wages will eventually rise to compensate them for what will seem like a burdensome obligation.

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,454
    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    My theory is that there are approx 10% of voters who like to back the winner (not sure if this is mostly conscious or just following the direction of the herd/latest fashion). The changes reflect increasing public awareness that Starmer will be PM after the next election.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,620

    darkage said:

    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    Otherwise known as the right to pick kids up from school, take dog for a walk, wash car, and get paid for it.
    In my experience this attitude is rapidly dying out; managers who think this way will become obsolete, in large parts of the workforce at least. It is better to accept that this is the new reality and adapt to it.

    Working full time, Monday to Friday, in the office is dead.

    For those who have to go in (teachers and the like) I wonder whether wages will eventually rise to compensate them for what will seem like a burdensome obligation.

    When do you think the issue of companies forcing low paid employees to work from home (no office) and forcing them to provide all the office equipment will become a political football?

    This is already happening in some low end jobs. Making the workers provide and equip their own office, in effect.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,183

    Cookie said:

    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    This is either meaningless or stupid.
    Presumably teachers, shop assistants, garage mechanics etc are jot going to be given the right to work from home.
    Bear in mind that we're getting the Telegraph's take on a leak, which may not be the entire story...

    If it's like the right to (request) part time work, there will be a "unless the job requires it" clause. It would be crazy otherwise. (Though if we take teachers, a model where they have to be in school for lessons but not if they don't have a class ought to be within the wit of man to plan.)

    And then we come back to quality of staff, management and systems. If you have the right staff, the work will still get done- even if they take 15 minutes out to collect a child from school, like I have just done. If you have the right management, they will be making sure the work is done well; that's their job. And yes, that will include spending on equipment and systems.

    But you need all that anyway. The idea that you can take unmotivated staff, mediocre managers and shlonky systems and make it function by putting it all in an office is for the birds. Besides- smart employers are dangling some WFH as a benefit of working for them; it's something employees appreciate. So if you don't want to offer that (lots of vacancies, remember), what do you offer instead?
    Well quite. If an employer values employees being in the office - and I think the consensus is that there is a value to this - it needs to pay more to attract staff from the employer which allows WFH.
    But in either case it is none of the state's business.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,454
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    An unknown from 2020 is how much covid had an effect on driving up the turnout for Biden.
    I think Trump was the major factor driving up turnout for Biden.

    I think the best case against Trump in 2024, was that the closer he was to a candidate in 2022, the worse they did.

    Take Kari Lake. She was Trump's biggest fan, and she repeated his talking points ad nauseum.

    Arizona, a purple state, in the midterms, with a charisma free Democratic candidate who refused to debate should have been an easy Republican hold. And indeed, the Republicans won six of the nine Congressional Districts, usually fairly comfortably.

    But Ms Lake trailed Republican Congressional candidates by 4 to 9 points in every district. The voters said "yes, we want Republicans, but we don't want the batshit crazy Trump ones."
    Those damn, pesky voters, always asking for the impossible.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    An unknown from 2020 is how much covid had an effect on driving up the turnout for Biden.
    I think Trump was the major factor driving up turnout for Biden.

    I think the best case against Trump in 2024, was that the closer he was to a candidate in 2022, the worse they did.

    Take Kari Lake. She was Trump's biggest fan, and she repeated his talking points ad nauseum.

    Arizona, a purple state, in the midterms, with a charisma free Democratic candidate who refused to debate should have been an easy Republican hold. And indeed, the Republicans won six of the nine Congressional Districts, usually fairly comfortably.

    But Ms Lake trailed Republican Congressional candidates by 4 to 9 points in every district. The voters said "yes, we want Republicans, but we don't want the batshit crazy Trump ones."
    Here's the Arizona Congressional results:



    And here's the Governor's race:



    The Democrats got almost 30% more votes when facing a Trump backed candidate, then when facing a generic Republican. While the Republicans got fewer votes.
    And yet, despite this evidence of toxicity you seem to be suggesting that the chances of the man himself winning in 2024 are understated?
    It's a two horse race in a very divided country. 25% is too low for Trump.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,718
    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    This is either meaningless or stupid.
    Presumably teachers, shop assistants, garage mechanics etc are jot going to be given the right to work from home.
    Bear in mind that we're getting the Telegraph's take on a leak, which may not be the entire story...

    If it's like the right to (request) part time work, there will be a "unless the job requires it" clause. It would be crazy otherwise. (Though if we take teachers, a model where they have to be in school for lessons but not if they don't have a class ought to be within the wit of man to plan.)

    And then we come back to quality of staff, management and systems. If you have the right staff, the work will still get done- even if they take 15 minutes out to collect a child from school, like I have just done. If you have the right management, they will be making sure the work is done well; that's their job. And yes, that will include spending on equipment and systems.

    But you need all that anyway. The idea that you can take unmotivated staff, mediocre managers and shlonky systems and make it function by putting it all in an office is for the birds. Besides- smart employers are dangling some WFH as a benefit of working for them; it's something employees appreciate. So if you don't want to offer that (lots of vacancies, remember), what do you offer instead?
    Well quite. If an employer values employees being in the office - and I think the consensus is that there is a value to this - it needs to pay more to attract staff from the employer which allows WFH.
    But in either case it is none of the state's business.
    Unless we’re talking about Civil Servants and the like.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,454
    edited May 2023

    Why is minimum wage inflationary but executive pay isn’t?

    Minimum wage inflation feeds into inflation for services and domestic manufacturing.
    Executive pay inflation feeds into inflation for property and risk assets.

    Of course both feed into both but to quite different extents and the property inflation of the last few decades is linked to a new landlord class who have done very well out of executive pay booming.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,739
    Another triumph for the Brexit delivery department, which you may recall from Sunak’s leadership campaign video featured a large shredder into which he would feed 2,400 nasty EU laws. Except now he won’t. “Labour talks,” Sunak likes to boast. “And the Conservatives deliver.” But they don’t. Not on boats, or inflation, or Brexit, or housing, or the NHS, or levelling up . . . or . . .

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tories-must-pray-that-penny-can-puncture-the-gloom-with-her-sword-hhj502j0g
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,920

    Why is minimum wage inflationary but executive pay isn’t?

    Many more get the former than get the latter. However, you’re right in so far as big boardroom pay increases mean that the rest of us are going to be much less willing to agree to tighten our belts.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    Scott_xP said:

    Another triumph for the Brexit delivery department, which you may recall from Sunak’s leadership campaign video featured a large shredder into which he would feed 2,400 nasty EU laws. Except now he won’t. “Labour talks,” Sunak likes to boast. “And the Conservatives deliver.” But they don’t. Not on boats, or inflation, or Brexit, or housing, or the NHS, or levelling up . . . or . . .

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tories-must-pray-that-penny-can-puncture-the-gloom-with-her-sword-hhj502j0g

    #StopTheSmallBoasts
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,145

    darkage said:

    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    Otherwise known as the right to pick kids up from school, take dog for a walk, wash car, and get paid for it.
    In my experience this attitude is rapidly dying out; managers who think this way will become obsolete, in large parts of the workforce at least. It is better to accept that this is the new reality and adapt to it.

    Working full time, Monday to Friday, in the office is dead.

    For those who have to go in (teachers and the like) I wonder whether wages will eventually rise to compensate them for what will seem like a burdensome obligation.

    When do you think the issue of companies forcing low paid employees to work from home (no office) and forcing them to provide all the office equipment will become a political football?

    This is already happening in some low end jobs. Making the workers provide and equip their own office, in effect.
    Bit late now. It's been an issue for delivery couriers, taxi-type services, etc., for years - a decade or more now? But good to see it dealt with.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    darkage said:


    kinabalu said:

    darkage said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    Yes, possibly more,

    I think @darkage has a very good point in that, because people don't want him to win and think he is so awful, it is skewing the betting. It happened in 2016. I got 6/1 on both Brexit and Trump on the days of both votes, which is crazy when you think both were two horse races and what the opinion polls were stating.

    I still very much think there is value in a Trump-RDS bet. RDS has not only blown his chances for 2024 but potentially for 2028. Even if he did consider running then, his performance this time will have emboldened other GOP names to throw their hat in the ring for next time. If RDS wants to be President, his best bet is to get himself nominated as Trump's VP pick.
    No it's the other way. People are overstating the chances of what they fear happening. They are also not processing the big picture properly. Trump's WH24 chances are nothing like current odds imply. It's a lay.
    It seems like the same dynamics brewing up again as 2016, but it could of course work out in a different way this time.

    I think he will get the nomination, and all these court cases etc help him with that... but it is less likely that he will win the actual vote - he is quite an off putting character. What is he offering to democrat leaning voters?
    Or to anyone beyond the MAGA base + GOP habituals. He'd have won in 2020 if he could have been just a little bit not himself but it was beyond him. And he's sunk even deeper into his own world now.

    2016? Ok but I don't see too big a similarity. Joe Biden isn't HRC and in 2016 Trump was an insurgent newcomer to politics whereas now he's a known quantity and most of what is known is negative to most people.
    It suppose it all goes down to how annoyed people are with the current government in a years time. Strange developments could also take place in the culture wars.
    Yep, there's lots could happen. I'm certainly not writing off Trump's chances entirely (much as I'd love to). It's more about the odds. I seem to be the only poster on this thread (apart from now Thomas Nashe) who thinks they are too short. Quite surprised by the weight of opinion the other way. Interesting.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    My theory is that there are approx 10% of voters who like to back the winner (not sure if this is mostly conscious or just following the direction of the herd/latest fashion). The changes reflect increasing public awareness that Starmer will be PM after the next election.
    👍 Nothing helps you succeed more than success and Sunak looks to be a loser.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,087
    edited May 2023

    darkage said:

    Dialup said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/12/labour-right-work-from-home-general-election-manifesto-leak/

    Labour to introduce right to work from home, leaked manifesto plan says

    Yes please! Thanks Keir!

    Otherwise known as the right to pick kids up from school, take dog for a walk, wash car, and get paid for it.
    In my experience this attitude is rapidly dying out; managers who think this way will become obsolete, in large parts of the workforce at least. It is better to accept that this is the new reality and adapt to it.

    Working full time, Monday to Friday, in the office is dead.

    For those who have to go in (teachers and the like) I wonder whether wages will eventually rise to compensate them for what will seem like a burdensome obligation.

    Already something of an issue in schools; not so much with teachers (yet, though recruitment for this year is utterly dismal) but definitely for admin and support staff.

    The more I look at it the more I can’t see how schools will be able to continue recruiting learning support assistants, & receptionists & many other roles which - let’s be honest - have often been done by women who needed term time-only jobs and so accepted low pay...

    That group can now do LOADS of other work which is flexible enough to work around picking kids up or taking time off in holidays. Even if the per hour is the same, the fact that it’s year-round, and hours can be done in evenings/mornings, makes a big difference to take-home pay.


    https://twitter.com/miss_mcinerney/status/1502331624012271620
  • kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    Wow. I'll give you tons better than that. I'll lay you @ 11/4 if you want.

    Your 4 against my 11. Do you have 4 of anything you can spare for when you lose?
    As so often you’re the one talking sense on this. He’s having to pay compensation to a woman he sexually assaulted, and that will allow him to win over the floating voters he would need? Poppycock!
    Thank you! People really are doing too much tree and not enough wood on this one. I've rarely seen a worse 11/4 bet.

    #unelectabletrump
    So let's look at the woods, and from the American side.

    We hear a lot about the problems surrounding Trump but we don't hear so much about Biden's and that is skewing the betting.

    Biden is facing increasingly serious questions over potential payoffs surrounding him and his family. Not only has he got the House on his back with an investigation but there are also now several whistleblowers in the IRS and FBI asking for Congressional protection and who have come forward to say that the corruption allegations were suppressed. The questions are multiplying to the point where the White House is now blocking reporters from attending briefings for the questions they keep asking about the allegations. The NY Post, Fox and now the WSJ are pushing the stories daily. Ok, not your cup on tea on here but they get read and it's a daily drip. That is not the only potentially damaging story for Biden but we will leave it at that.

    Biden's poll ratings are poor. Trump's are worse but, for someone touted on here by some as one of the best US Presidents ever, they are not great. And that is before the immigration crisis which (again) is now rearing its head.

    You also then have the social media phenomenon that is Joe Rogan, while not a Trump fan and often critical, increasingly laying into Biden as too old and essentially senile. Musk is now in charge of Twitter.

    Meanwhile, the GOP post-the 2022 elections has finally decided to go full in on mail in voting and to copy the Democrat techniques. When the GOP did that in CA post-the 2018 losses, their performance improved.

    Then let's look at the individual states. North Carolina, the most vulnerable GOP state, looks increasingly - on their recent elections - turning more Red. Meanwhile, with the possible exception of Michigan, all the other 2020 Biden state gains are very much in play plus Nevada. If 45,000 people in the swing states had voted Trump instead of Biden, Trump would have won the EC. It doesn't take that many

    Trump should be around 2/1. It's a two horse race in a deeply divided country and where the independents don't feel enthused about either candidate.

  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,087
    Well...

    A well-connected Tory police and crime commissioner triggered two different police investigations into political opponents in recent weeks, Sky News can reveal.

    Steve Turner, PCC for Cleveland, was attempting to become a Tory councillor in Redcar in the Tees Valley, in addition to his existing £73,300 role overseeing the area's police service.

    During the campaign, Mr Turner twice alleged crimes were committed and triggered investigations by his local force.


    https://news.sky.com/story/tory-crime-commissioner-triggered-two-police-investigations-into-political-opponents-during-local-elections-bid-12879194
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    edited May 2023

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    I think both Biden and Trump are underpriced: it's hard to see any other nominees, and while Biden should be favorite, he should be a relatively narrow one.
    Yes, I think that is spot-on.
    Nooo, it's spot OFF as regards Trump. He's too short. 3.75 to regain the WH? C'mon!
    How confident are you that US republican primary voters are as rational as you are?
    Ha, 'rational' and 'GOP primary voters' in the same sentence? No, I'm glad my betting short is mainly on the WH not the Nom. He's no slam dunk for the Nom imo but as we speak he does look good for it. RDS is surely going to run, though, isn't he. Ebbing a little at the moment but it could be he has some flow to come. Can't stand the guy but that's not the point here.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    Wow. I'll give you tons better than that. I'll lay you @ 11/4 if you want.

    Your 4 against my 11. Do you have 4 of anything you can spare for when you lose?
    As so often you’re the one talking sense on this. He’s having to pay compensation to a woman he sexually assaulted, and that will allow him to win over the floating voters he would need? Poppycock!
    Thank you! People really are doing too much tree and not enough wood on this one. I've rarely seen a worse 11/4 bet.

    #unelectabletrump
    So let's look at the woods, and from the American side.

    We hear a lot about the problems surrounding Trump but we don't hear so much about Biden's and that is skewing the betting.

    Biden is facing increasingly serious questions over potential payoffs surrounding him and his family. Not only has he got the House on his back with an investigation but there are also now several whistleblowers in the IRS and FBI asking for Congressional protection and who have come forward to say that the corruption allegations were suppressed. The questions are multiplying to the point where the White House is now blocking reporters from attending briefings for the questions they keep asking about the allegations. The NY Post, Fox and now the WSJ are pushing the stories daily. Ok, not your cup on tea on here but they get read and it's a daily drip. That is not the only potentially damaging story for Biden but we will leave it at that.

    Biden's poll ratings are poor. Trump's are worse but, for someone touted on here by some as one of the best US Presidents ever, they are not great. And that is before the immigration crisis which (again) is now rearing its head.

    You also then have the social media phenomenon that is Joe Rogan, while not a Trump fan and often critical, increasingly laying into Biden as too old and essentially senile. Musk is now in charge of Twitter.

    Meanwhile, the GOP post-the 2022 elections has finally decided to go full in on mail in voting and to copy the Democrat techniques. When the GOP did that in CA post-the 2018 losses, their performance improved.

    Then let's look at the individual states. North Carolina, the most vulnerable GOP state, looks increasingly - on their recent elections - turning more Red. Meanwhile, with the possible exception of Michigan, all the other 2020 Biden state gains are very much in play plus Nevada. If 45,000 people in the swing states had voted Trump instead of Biden, Trump would have won the EC. It doesn't take that many

    Trump should be around 2/1. It's a two horse race in a deeply divided country and where the independents don't feel enthused about either candidate.

    Who has touted Biden as "one of the best US Presidents ever"?
    I've never seen anyone say that. The prevailing mood I get is "thank fuck it isn't Trump".
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,089
    AlistairM said:

    Russia claiming a strike today in Luhansk was from Storm Shadow. If true, then Ukraine are putting their new resources to immediate use.

    ⚡️⚡️🇷🇺Russian propaganda reports that the strike was carried out by a 🇬🇧British-🇫🇷French Storm Shadow cruise missile
    https://twitter.com/front_ukrainian/status/1657049636014571521

    Edit: Luhansk is well outside HIMARS range.

    Whether it is or isn't, there will be a tendency to blame such explosions on long range missile strikes. I can imagine there will be far more reported explosions than weapons systems.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279

    Why is minimum wage inflationary but executive pay isn’t?

    The only thing I can think of is that there are so few executives that it wouldn't make a difference.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415

    Dialup said:

    2/ The Prime Minister’s approval rating is hanging like a puppet on a string this week as his net approval rating plunged by 8 points to -13:

    👍 Approve: 28% (-6)
    👎 Disapprove: 42% (+3)
    🤷 Neither: 30% (+2)

    https://twitter.com/Omnisis/status/1657034387240677377

    Something has happened to Rishi Sunak.

    Mainly the thing that happens to all Prime Ministers. In the end, the job beats them all, because it's fundamentally impossible. The only question is how long it takes and what good they can do in the meantime.
    “what good they can do in the meantime”

    You mean like Boris Johnson? He wasn’t even in three years, and he assassinated the Conservative Party.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,918
    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    Yeah... not really...
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,415
    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Andy_JS said:

    Why is minimum wage inflationary but executive pay isn’t?

    The only thing I can think of is that there are so few executives that it wouldn't make a difference.
    Also, minimum wage increases probably create demands for increases further up the scale, to maintain differentials, in a way that executive pay doesn't filter down.

    That isn't a statement of fairness or how it should be; just of reality.

    FWIW, the growth in executive pay these last 20 years or so is out of all proportion to results.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,239
    Bloomberg (via Seattle Times) - Tucker Carlson’s relaunch plan is bigger than Twitter

    When Tucker Carlson said this week that he’s starting a new show on Twitter, he sounded much like he did as the top-rated host on Fox News. . . .

    But at the end of the three-minute video, there was a new wrinkle: a plug for Carlson’s website, where he asked fans to sign up for updates with their names, email addresses and phone numbers. . . .

    To observers, Carlson likely chose Twitter because his contract with Fox Corp. prevents him from appearing on another cable news channel. At the same time, he wants to remain relevant as the 2024 election nears, and Twitter provides him with a megaphone. . . .

    Carlson, 53, wouldn’t be the first former Fox News star to start a media business. Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly have all ventured into podcasts, radio and online TV shows, among other things.

    “I don’t think they’ve approached the level of popularity they had when they were on Fox,” [rightwing social media analyst] Polskin said. “There’s no substitute to having the Fox promotional machine and ecosystem behind your broadcast. That is almost priceless.”

    Fox reportedly paid Carlson about $20 million a year. Whether he can make as much on Twitter remains to be seen.

    In recent months, Twitter owner Elon Musk has tried to make the social network more lucrative for big personalities. He said Twitter would share advertising revenue with users if they are verified through Twitter Blue. He also said creators can charge subscriptions to tweets, pictures and videos.

    Carlson could, for instance, put his Twitter videos behind a paywall, where only subscribers have access. Through a mix of advertising and subscription revenue, he could end up making more than he did at Fox, according to Vox’s Peter Kafka. . . .

    Twitter isn’t conducive to long videos. . . .

    Twitter has made a push into video before. Sports leagues and media outlets started streaming live programs on the platform. They included a popular morning talk show created by BuzzFeed News called “AM to DM.” By 2019, the show was averaging about 400,000 views per episode. But a year later, Twitter pulled the funding and BuzzFeed stopped producing it.

    Under Musk, Twitter has been revamping its video ambitions. This week, Musk said video is now a “primary focus,” and in recent months the company has rolled out additional ways for users to monetize their video content.

    With Carlson hosting a show, Twitter could generate more engagement and take a cut of the advertising and subscription revenue he pulls in. . . .

    On her podcast, Kelly called Carlson’s move “smart” because “Twitter is better than ever.”

    “Conservatives feel welcome there now in a way they didn’t before Elon,” she said. “And it’s a great way of reaching millions and millions of fans.”

    https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1656037032538390530?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    I think Leon is right, and the million net migration figure is going to be incredibly toxic.

    And this is a net number.

    It’s astonishingly high.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    HYUFD said:

    Trump still has a strong chance of winning the GOP nomination, however his chances of winning back swing voters and Independents in the general election are falling by the day

    Let's hope so.

    For god's sake, and ours, Biden better not collapse (literally or figuratively).
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,087

    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
    Quite a lot of people got to the end of April's money before they got to the end of April.

    The government threw a lot of cash at people over winter 2022/3. Some of it definitely necessary, but not all of it. And now it's stopped. Perhaps the mystery is why it bought so few votes.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,087
    Andy_JS said:

    Why is minimum wage inflationary but executive pay isn’t?

    The only thing I can think of is that there are so few executives that it wouldn't make a difference.
    Most execs are members of the L'Oreal Class - they award themselves huge pay rises and bonuses because they think they're worth it.

    These are also the same people who then tell their minions that pay increases cannot be afforded because of market conditions and the business being too hard up to pay them (irrespective of whether or not it's just handed out about £37 squillion in shareholder dividends,) and that the plebs must therefore accept 1% and be grateful that their roles aren't being offshored to Romania or India.

    The wage-price spiral is just one more excuse to add to their arguments, aided by their mates in the old boy's network such as our very wealthy Chancellor, our immensely rich Prime Minister, the Governor of the Bank of England and sundry other troughers.

    Ignore them all, they're lying. The Unions are correct in this case. Wage increases (which are still almost invariably below the current rate of inflation, even when workers fight tooth and nail to get something better than the 1-2% that a lot of tight bosses would like to palm them off with,) have nothing to do with creating the present inflationary environment. The motivation for wage restraint for ordinary workers is typically to ensure that as much money as possible flows into the coffers of the rich.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,087

    I think Leon is right, and the million net migration figure is going to be incredibly toxic.

    And this is a net number.

    It’s astonishingly high.

    Trouble is that immigration also seems to be the only thing keeping public services and the profitable economy from falling over and dying in the mud.

    Beggars can't be choosers and all that. And whilst the UK are some way off actual beggary, the direction we're taking is uncomfortably directed in that way.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    kinabalu said:

    Farooq said:

    darkage said:

    I get a sense with Trump that people don't believe it will happen because it is unthinkable and then - as a result - the betting doesn't price the situation correctly. I think that is happening here.

    I think it is realistic that he would win in 2024 and, whilst not ideal, I don't think it would be a total disaster; we would just need to get on with it, as we did last time.

    People are so hysterical about Trump, you could imagine him winning the election and there being a serious attempt to prevent him taking office again.
    He's a sexual abuser and he tried to stop the democratic election from playing out last time. Any concerns people have about him are well-founded and fall very far short of the label "hysterical" being applicable.

    If you can't be alarmed about a pussy-grabbing, election-interfering, white nationalist madman being elected, is there anything you can be alarmed at?
    It's amazing isn't it. Trump coming back is just objectively a grim and scary prospect. I cannot understand how anyone in their right mind who pays any attention to this can feel otherwise.
    It's pathetic is what it is. Yes, people do get very worried, vocally so, about Trump winning again. Some will even overdo, such as is possible. It is possible he could win legitimately, and given the power of the US President there's nothing wrong with people opposed to him expressing that. Whether his opponents would seek to use the same methods he unleased last time - bogus lawsuits, intimidation of officials, refusal to this day to concede, even after at a minimum inspiring peopel who sought to prevent the transfer of power - remains to be seen, and would be wrong if they did. It's a question for another day.

    But is it really hysterical for people to worry about the very provable things he did and does, said and says, rather than a theoetical possibility of his opponents trying to prevent him taking over if he did win again?

    Is it not more hysterical to moan about the possible actions of people in response to a scenario than things in the hear and now?

  • pingping Posts: 3,724
    edited May 2023
    pigeon said:

    Well...

    A well-connected Tory police and crime commissioner triggered two different police investigations into political opponents in recent weeks, Sky News can reveal.

    Steve Turner, PCC for Cleveland, was attempting to become a Tory councillor in Redcar in the Tees Valley, in addition to his existing £73,300 role overseeing the area's police service.

    During the campaign, Mr Turner twice alleged crimes were committed and triggered investigations by his local force.


    https://news.sky.com/story/tory-crime-commissioner-triggered-two-police-investigations-into-political-opponents-during-local-elections-bid-12879194

    I think the democratisation of policing was a disaster.

    The main reason for the pcc system was to shift blame away from the home office / home sec / PM / party in govt and direct anger elsewhere.

    It was cooked up in a different era, an austerity era. And the Cameroons were personally vulnerable on crime (prior hard drug use etc). This was one of the lessons they’d learned from the major years. Liberals get whipsawed when they go “tough on crime”

    Solution? Make it someone else’s problem. And slash the HO budget as much as you can get away with.

    The tories, facing electoral oblivion back in 2019, were forced into ditching austerity for the police - making the justification for the PCC system largely redundant.

    Nobody votes in the stupid elections anyway, and everyone still blames the “government”/party in government/PM/Home Secretary (delete as appropriate), for the inevitable fuck ups / lack of police etc etc.

    PCC must be the worst jobs in politics, anyway. Get rid of ‘em.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,454

    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
    Quite a lot of people got to the end of April's money before they got to the end of April.

    The government threw a lot of cash at people over winter 2022/3. Some of it definitely necessary, but not all of it. And now it's stopped. Perhaps the mystery is why it bought so few votes.
    Energy firms hold £7bn of consumer owned cash at the moment, earning hundreds of millions in interest from it, when many of those consumers with significant balances are struggling to make ends meet, cutting back on consumption that would help other businesses and paying loan sharks silly interest rates.

    Another example of silly broken Britain with a weak regulator asleep on the job, and corporates taking the mick.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,771

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    As an aside, the US electorate usually give two terms to their Presidents, the exceptions being the hapless Carter and Bush Sr (who was a third term Republican President).

    Indeed, the last time that a party lost the White house after a single term led to three terms for the other guys.

    An unknown from 2020 is how much covid had an effect on driving up the turnout for Biden.
    I think Trump was the major factor driving up turnout for Biden.

    I think the best case against Trump in 2024, was that the closer he was to a candidate in 2022, the worse they did.

    Take Kari Lake. She was Trump's biggest fan, and she repeated his talking points ad nauseum.

    Arizona, a purple state, in the midterms, with a charisma free Democratic candidate who refused to debate should have been an easy Republican hold. And indeed, the Republicans won six of the nine Congressional Districts, usually fairly comfortably.

    But Ms Lake trailed Republican Congressional candidates by 4 to 9 points in every district. The voters said "yes, we want Republicans, but we don't want the batshit crazy Trump ones."
    Here's the Arizona Congressional results:



    And here's the Governor's race:



    The Democrats got almost 30% more votes when facing a Trump backed candidate, then when facing a generic Republican. While the Republicans got fewer votes.
    I don't think it is as clear cut as that.

    Yes, in Arizona, the Governorship should have been a GOP hold. But Lake was / is extreme. Turnout was down over 2% over the previous election. And the GOP gains in the House in AZ were helped by redistricting,

    However, it's more the case when you look at other elections. Take Colorado. Jon O'Dea - the GOP candidate for Senator - was supposed to be the shining example of a moderate GOP, non-Trump aligned candidate who would pose a threat to Bennett who was seen as uninspiring. But O'Dea lost by over 14 points.

    Contrast that with the NY Governorship race. Lee Zeldin was very much a Trump-favourite candidate and running in.a very blue state, However, he came very close to causing a major upset in taking the Governorship and it is generally acknowledged his campaign helped the GOP win four House seats in the state (and lead to the bizarre situation, as someone put it, that the Democrat majority in the NY Senate race was less than the one in Colorado).

    What particularly marked out the Trump-aligned GOP candidates who underperformed was their generally whacko personalities.
    Well, let's look at Colorado's Congressional results shall we.

    John O'Dea got almost exactly the same number of votes as his House of Representatives colleagues, and lost by essentially the same margin - 13 vs 14 points. So, you can (rightly) say that John O'Dea wasn't a help to his ticket against Generic Republican. But nor was he a drag. He performed exactly as well as Republican Congressional candidates.

    If Kari Lake had performed as well as a Generic Republican, she would have won at a canter.

    And - sure - Zeldin did well in New York. But he didn't do *that* well compared to generic Republicans, because New York was the real high point in the Republican House Elections too. They moved the needle from 19-8 to 15-11, and increased their vote share 8 points. And yes, Zeldin outperformed, but not by much compared to a generic Republican, he got 46.8% v 43.9% for the House candidates.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
    Final run up to a vote causes people to reflect a bit more, and the loss itself then drives a bit of a reduction further.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,059

    Bloomberg (via Seattle Times) - Tucker Carlson’s relaunch plan is bigger than Twitter

    When Tucker Carlson said this week that he’s starting a new show on Twitter, he sounded much like he did as the top-rated host on Fox News. . . .

    But at the end of the three-minute video, there was a new wrinkle: a plug for Carlson’s website, where he asked fans to sign up for updates with their names, email addresses and phone numbers. . . .

    To observers, Carlson likely chose Twitter because his contract with Fox Corp. prevents him from appearing on another cable news channel. At the same time, he wants to remain relevant as the 2024 election nears, and Twitter provides him with a megaphone. . . .

    Carlson, 53, wouldn’t be the first former Fox News star to start a media business. Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly and Megyn Kelly have all ventured into podcasts, radio and online TV shows, among other things.

    “I don’t think they’ve approached the level of popularity they had when they were on Fox,” [rightwing social media analyst] Polskin said. “There’s no substitute to having the Fox promotional machine and ecosystem behind your broadcast. That is almost priceless.”

    Fox reportedly paid Carlson about $20 million a year. Whether he can make as much on Twitter remains to be seen.

    In recent months, Twitter owner Elon Musk has tried to make the social network more lucrative for big personalities. He said Twitter would share advertising revenue with users if they are verified through Twitter Blue. He also said creators can charge subscriptions to tweets, pictures and videos.

    Carlson could, for instance, put his Twitter videos behind a paywall, where only subscribers have access. Through a mix of advertising and subscription revenue, he could end up making more than he did at Fox, according to Vox’s Peter Kafka. . . .

    Twitter isn’t conducive to long videos. . . .

    Twitter has made a push into video before. Sports leagues and media outlets started streaming live programs on the platform. They included a popular morning talk show created by BuzzFeed News called “AM to DM.” By 2019, the show was averaging about 400,000 views per episode. But a year later, Twitter pulled the funding and BuzzFeed stopped producing it.

    Under Musk, Twitter has been revamping its video ambitions. This week, Musk said video is now a “primary focus,” and in recent months the company has rolled out additional ways for users to monetize their video content.

    With Carlson hosting a show, Twitter could generate more engagement and take a cut of the advertising and subscription revenue he pulls in. . . .

    On her podcast, Kelly called Carlson’s move “smart” because “Twitter is better than ever.”

    “Conservatives feel welcome there now in a way they didn’t before Elon,” she said. “And it’s a great way of reaching millions and millions of fans.”

    https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1656037032538390530?

    Always meant to ask. Who was SeaShantyIrish1?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083

    I think Leon is right…

    Let’s just savour such a rare moment…..
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    ping said:

    pigeon said:

    Well...

    A well-connected Tory police and crime commissioner triggered two different police investigations into political opponents in recent weeks, Sky News can reveal.

    Steve Turner, PCC for Cleveland, was attempting to become a Tory councillor in Redcar in the Tees Valley, in addition to his existing £73,300 role overseeing the area's police service.

    During the campaign, Mr Turner twice alleged crimes were committed and triggered investigations by his local force.


    https://news.sky.com/story/tory-crime-commissioner-triggered-two-police-investigations-into-political-opponents-during-local-elections-bid-12879194

    I think the democratisation of policing was a disaster.

    The main reason for the pcc system was to shift blame away from the home office / home sec / PM / party in govt and direct anger elsewhere.

    It was cooked up in a different era, an austerity era. And the Cameroons were personally vulnerable on crime (prior hard drug use etc). This was one of the lessons they’d learned from the major years. Liberals get whipsawed when they go “tough on crime”

    Solution? Make it someone else’s problem. And slash the HO budget as much as you can get away with.

    The tories, facing electoral oblivion back in 2019, were forced into ditching austerity for the police - making the justification for the PCC system largely redundant.

    Nobody votes in the stupid elections anyway, and everyone still blames the “government”/party in government/PM/Home Secretary (delete as appropriate), for the inevitable fuck ups / lack of police etc etc.
    It was poorly conceived from the very start. As you conclude people do not really, on the whole, judge some commissioner they've barely heard of for the performance of their local police, and very few would turnout at all had they not wizened up and combined them on dates with other elections, and it's still low. So the idea it's good because we get to judge them on their record is a load of nonsense. And Panels to scrutinse the Commissioner to scrutinise thepolice are still there, it's such a circle jerk.

    Paying the salary of all of them together may still not add up to much in the grander scheme of things, but they are also stupendously well remunerated jobs for what they actually do.

    Sure, to a degree local councillors and even MPs will also be judged on the basis of the national situation and not local factors, but it is a much smaller degree and there are at least occasions when local performance is relevant. The PCC will just blame the Chief Constable if things continue to go poorly under them, so yet another reason to doubt people are assessing things that way.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    The PCC is a classic British bungle. Get rid.

    Keep it simple. Every county and metro should have a separate police force, with some form of accountability to the Mayor.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343
    edited May 2023
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Trump still has a strong chance of winning the GOP nomination, however his chances of winning back swing voters and Independents in the general election are falling by the day

    Let's hope so.

    For god's sake, and ours, Biden better not collapse (literally or figuratively).
    However; in my ignorance of USA elections I looked at polling.

    Here it is:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_States_presidential_election


    If the polling is meaningful (no idea) and if winning the poll overall means you might win the presidency (which all seems a bit random) then with the polling as it is now you would say Trump is not far short of even money, if you assume (as I am doing) that he is the candidate.

    So is the 23% shot on account of the legal/criminal obstacles?

    The other point is this: in a normal country you can see how the public might be fooled by a depraved fascist narcissist once, but not twice. Is there real evidence that the USA follows this logic? The polling suggests maybe not. This is not a market I am entering.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    edited May 2023

    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
    Quite a lot of people got to the end of April's money before they got to the end of April.

    The government threw a lot of cash at people over winter 2022/3. Some of it definitely necessary, but not all of it. And now it's stopped. Perhaps the mystery is why it bought so few votes.
    Energy firms hold £7bn of consumer owned cash at the moment, earning hundreds of millions in interest from it, when many of those consumers with significant balances are struggling to make ends meet, cutting back on consumption that would help other businesses and paying loan sharks silly interest rates.

    Another example of silly broken Britain with a weak regulator asleep on the job, and corporates taking the mick.
    British regulators are piss weak.
    That was bad enough when utilities were British owned, but now they’re all in the hands of Canadian pensioners.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279

    The PCC is a classic British bungle. Get rid.

    Keep it simple. Every county and metro should have a separate police force, with some form of accountability to the Mayor.

    The turnouts at the elections have been embarrassing.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    edited May 2023

    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
    Maybe it's the slight uptick in the Tory position a few weeks ago that requires explanation rather than these latest figures. I'm not sure what the reason is.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,087
    ping said:

    pigeon said:

    Well...

    A well-connected Tory police and crime commissioner triggered two different police investigations into political opponents in recent weeks, Sky News can reveal.

    Steve Turner, PCC for Cleveland, was attempting to become a Tory councillor in Redcar in the Tees Valley, in addition to his existing £73,300 role overseeing the area's police service.

    During the campaign, Mr Turner twice alleged crimes were committed and triggered investigations by his local force.


    https://news.sky.com/story/tory-crime-commissioner-triggered-two-police-investigations-into-political-opponents-during-local-elections-bid-12879194

    I think the democratisation of policing was a disaster.

    The main reason for the pcc system was to shift blame away from the home office / home sec / PM / party in govt and direct anger elsewhere.

    It was cooked up in a different era, an austerity era. And the Cameroons were personally vulnerable on crime (prior hard drug use etc). This was one of the lessons they’d learned from the major years. Liberals get whipsawed when they go “tough on crime”

    Solution? Make it someone else’s problem. And slash the HO budget as much as you can get away with.

    The tories, facing electoral oblivion back in 2019, were forced into ditching austerity for the police - making the justification for the PCC system largely redundant.

    Nobody votes in the stupid elections anyway, and everyone still blames the “government”/party in government/PM/Home Secretary (delete as appropriate), for the inevitable fuck ups / lack of police etc etc.
    And yet we may predict with confidence that the PCCs will still be around in a hundred years' time. Having created another load of expensive and useless sinecures for over-promoted local councillors, what future Government is going to dare - or, indeed, feel any real motivation - to get rid of them?

    Of course, PCCs are potentially only the beginning. Imagine what'll happen if Starmer gets the opportunity to replace the Lords and actually follows through on it. He's hardly going to create an upper house with any more ability to challenge the Commons than the one that presently exists, now is he? Instead of a talking shop full of sundry ex-MPs, crossbench worthies and bishops who are only eligible for attendance fees and travel allowances, we'll get a talking shop consisting of three or four hundred more over-promoted local councillors, all picking up about eighty grand a year and probably doing a less effective job of scrutinising legislation than the ramshackle chamber we have now.

    At the end of the day, it's all about jobs for the boys. Again.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    Andy_JS said:

    The PCC is a classic British bungle. Get rid.

    Keep it simple. Every county and metro should have a separate police force, with some form of accountability to the Mayor.

    The turnouts at the elections have been embarrassing.
    Of course. They’re a pile of crap.
    I’m embarrassed that this was an LD idea.

    Scrap the bastards. It’s 2023. There’s no time or room for such redundancies.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited May 2023
    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,019
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    I think both Biden and Trump are underpriced: it's hard to see any other nominees, and while Biden should be favorite, he should be a relatively narrow one.
    Yes, I think that is spot-on.
    Nooo, it's spot OFF as regards Trump. He's too short. 3.75 to regain the WH? C'mon!
    How confident are you that US republican primary voters are as rational as you are?
    Ha, 'rational' and 'GOP primary voters' in the same sentence? No, I'm glad my betting short is mainly on the WH not the Nom. He's no slam dunk for the Nom imo but as we speak he does look good for it. RDS is surely going to run, though, isn't he. Ebbing a little at the moment but it could be he has some flow to come. Can't stand the guy but that's not the point here.
    Never let your opinions of the candidate or the party influence your betting.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002
    Good evening

    There is a definite negative shift in the polls against the conservatives and I would put it down to the terrible local election results highlighting just how unpopular they are

    They are tired and frankly looking defeated, and going into opposition is the best way for them to regroup as long as it is as a one nation conservative party otherwise many wilderness years beckon

    Having said that all the serious issues will still be present and Starmer/ Labour will face many hard years ahead as there are no simple and easy answers
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,087
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
    Maybe it's the slight uptick in the Tory position a few weeks ago that requires explanation rather than these latest figures. I'm not sure what the reason is.
    People don't pay council tax in February and March. That's enough to make a lot of people feel better off, especially in a Cost of Living crisis.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited May 2023
    I was looking at the 2019 Labour manifesto to see if they promised to abolish PCCs, so I could praise Corbyn for something. Regrettably not the case, and I doubt they will - given they win many of them.

    Pigeon sets out how that will go, and may well expand to boot.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
    Maybe it's the slight uptick in the Tory position a few weeks ago that requires explanation rather than these latest figures. I'm not sure what the reason is.

    The Tory uptick was almost exclusively down to 2019 Tory Don't Knows returning to the fold on the back of a couple of positive, Sunak-centric news cycles for the Tories. If some are now moving back to DK because the good news has died away, that would explain the drop.

    The Labour+LibDem+Green number in all the polling for the last few months has been entirely consistent with the aggregate Labour+LibDem+Green total in the local elections. For those of us who have bene going on about anti-Tory tactical voting for a while now, it all makes perfect sense!

  • pingping Posts: 3,724

    Andy_JS said:

    The PCC is a classic British bungle. Get rid.

    Keep it simple. Every county and metro should have a separate police force, with some form of accountability to the Mayor.

    The turnouts at the elections have been embarrassing.
    Of course. They’re a pile of crap.
    I’m embarrassed that this was an LD idea.

    Scrap the bastards. It’s 2023. There’s no time or room for such redundancies.
    Was it really a Lib Dem idea?

    I assumed it was cooked up by Dave and George.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,454

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    I agree that Trump’s chances of winning are considerably in excess of 23.8%

    More like 40%

    I think both Biden and Trump are underpriced: it's hard to see any other nominees, and while Biden should be favorite, he should be a relatively narrow one.
    Yes, I think that is spot-on.
    Nooo, it's spot OFF as regards Trump. He's too short. 3.75 to regain the WH? C'mon!
    How confident are you that US republican primary voters are as rational as you are?
    Ha, 'rational' and 'GOP primary voters' in the same sentence? No, I'm glad my betting short is mainly on the WH not the Nom. He's no slam dunk for the Nom imo but as we speak he does look good for it. RDS is surely going to run, though, isn't he. Ebbing a little at the moment but it could be he has some flow to come. Can't stand the guy but that's not the point here.
    Never let your opinions of the candidate or the party influence your betting.
    It is absolutely fine to let opinions of the candidates and their capabilities, influence betting far in advance of an election, just don't do it in the run up to an election.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 948
    edited May 2023

    The UK is currently trialling an innovative combination of building no homes, opening the borders, raising taxes, and letting public services rot.

    The party which has done this is then going to ask a coalition of social conservatives and free marketeers to vote for it next year.


    https://twitter.com/sashworthhayes/status/1656959143729590272?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    The trouble is that as far as I can see, the other lot's policies (such as they are) boil down to "do it harder and faster*". I can't see that the end result will be much different.

    Hence why all the culture war stuff, as about the only policy difference between Rishi and Starmer is that Starmer doesn't know what a woman is.

    *Possibly with even higher taxes and more money hosed at the public services so they rot slightly more slowly.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    Lincolnshire’s flag is hideous.
    They desperately need a do-over.

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e0/Lincolnshire_flag.svg/1920px-Lincolnshire_flag.svg.png
  • stodgestodge Posts: 12,741
    Late afternoon all :)

    Techne is averagely bad, Omnisis back to the days of Liz Truss.

    Techne has Labour on 45%, Conservative on 28% and the LDs on 11% so fits pretty well into the current polling pattern. Omnisis, which is probably as much an outlier as Redfield & Wilton was on Monday, just looks awful for the Conservatives - 51-24-10.

    Just for fun, that's a 19.5% swing from Conservative to Labour and a 9.5% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat. That takes us to Harwich & Essex North, the 274th most marginal Conservative seat, where Labour requires a 19.4% swing to oust Bernard Jenkin. That would leave the Conservatives with fewer than 100 MPs and while not the most extreme of extinction events, would be the worst Conservative performance since 1832 on both votes cast and seats won.

    So, two huge outliers at either end of the week it seems with other pollsters keeping the Labour lead in the high teens.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited May 2023

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    I do, like the chap in the video, kind of mark down what might be reasonable designs (on the basis some of the seals are good), due to being too similar to one another if you were lining them up next to each other.

    Many of the county flags are a bit busy or dizzying in colour, but I think that makes them more distintive and appealing.
    Of course few are aware of them and fewer use them, good or bad, as it is a bit late to try to develop (or overdevelop) a sense of county identiy the way US States can. Outside of Yorkshire anyway.

    But i fly my bustard flag with pride.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Anyway, surely Hawaii has the best state flag because it has the UK flag in it?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083

    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Dialup said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 51% (+3)
    CON: 24% (-3)
    LDM: 10% (+3)
    RFM: 6% (=)
    GRN: 4% (-2)
    SNP: 3% (-1)

    Via @Omnisis, 11-12 May.
    Changes w/ 4-5 May.

    https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1657035671540838403

    30 point lead. Incoming.

    No need for SKS fans to explain.
    How do you explain what’s happening? What’s driving it. This Tory poll slide began a week before last weeks voting.
    Maybe it's the slight uptick in the Tory position a few weeks ago that requires explanation rather than these latest figures. I'm not sure what the reason is.
    People don't pay council tax in February and March. That's enough to make a lot of people feel better off, especially in a Cost of Living crisis.
    You now have the right to opt for twelve equal instalments, rather than paying extra upfront.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    edited May 2023
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    I do, like the chap in the video, kind of mark down what might be reasonable designs (on the basis some of the seals are good), due to being too similar to one another if you were lining them up next to each other.

    Many of the county flags are a bit busy or dizzying in colour, but I think that makes them more distintive and appealing.
    Of course few are aware of them and fewer use them, good or bad, as it is a bit late to try to develop (or overdevelop) a sense of county identiy the way US States can. Outside of Yorkshire anyway.

    I think the colour palette used is often offensive. Like they were created on a BBC Micro. I actually like a lot of these, but I find Lincs, Notts and Northants kind of hideous.

    Some others are just dull.

    I really like the colour and detail of the US state flags.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,005
    23.8% is too high for comfort.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002
    My wife and I have been invited for our 6th covid vaccine in early June

    Additionally we had it quite badly last August

    I wasn't aware an early summer vaccine programme was going ahead
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    I do, like the chap in the video, kind of mark down what might be reasonable designs (on the basis some of the seals are good), due to being too similar to one another if you were lining them up next to each other.

    Many of the county flags are a bit busy or dizzying in colour, but I think that makes them more distintive and appealing.
    Of course few are aware of them and fewer use them, good or bad, as it is a bit late to try to develop (or overdevelop) a sense of county identiy the way US States can. Outside of Yorkshire anyway.

    But i fly my bustard flag with pride.
    You missed one…
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    I do, like the chap in the video, kind of mark down what might be reasonable designs (on the basis some of the seals are good), due to being too similar to one another if you were lining them up next to each other.

    Many of the county flags are a bit busy or dizzying in colour, but I think that makes them more distintive and appealing.
    Of course few are aware of them and fewer use them, good or bad, as it is a bit late to try to develop (or overdevelop) a sense of county identiy the way US States can. Outside of Yorkshire anyway.


    I really like the colour and detail of the US state flags.
    Seal on blue is colourful and detailed? I guess, if you've got time to get a magnifying glass out.

    I call it 50/50, better than the county ratio due to too much yellow already.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,231
    DougSeal said:

    Lovely piece on my friend Daniel Gould who was in my year at college and made his living betting on Eurovision before his untimely death four years ago -

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-65388335

    We badly need a "thank you" button. Many people here post interseting things and links ad although I can't read them all I do try. Many of them expound views or positions that I do not like but still wish to thank the poster for posting the link. This is such a case... :(
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    I do, like the chap in the video, kind of mark down what might be reasonable designs (on the basis some of the seals are good), due to being too similar to one another if you were lining them up next to each other.

    Many of the county flags are a bit busy or dizzying in colour, but I think that makes them more distintive and appealing.
    Of course few are aware of them and fewer use them, good or bad, as it is a bit late to try to develop (or overdevelop) a sense of county identiy the way US States can. Outside of Yorkshire anyway.

    But i fly my bustard flag with pride.

    Top three:

    1. Northumberland
    2. Cornwall
    3. Devon

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,454

    Good evening

    There is a definite negative shift in the polls against the conservatives and I would put it down to the terrible local election results highlighting just how unpopular they are

    They are tired and frankly looking defeated, and going into opposition is the best way for them to regroup as long as it is as a one nation conservative party otherwise many wilderness years beckon

    Having said that all the serious issues will still be present and Starmer/ Labour will face many hard years ahead as there are no simple and easy answers

    There are simple and easy answers, its just that they are neither electorally popular nor quick to implement, so instead voters get sucked in to cheap and empty promises.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    My wife and I have been invited for our 6th covid vaccine in early June

    Additionally we had it quite badly last August

    I wasn't aware an early summer vaccine programme was going ahead

    Hope you'll go for it. Anedotally I know quite a few people not getting ones they've been invited for, and talking down vaccinations as a whole.

    I fear we have to relearn that vaccines do a lot of good all over again.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    I do, like the chap in the video, kind of mark down what might be reasonable designs (on the basis some of the seals are good), due to being too similar to one another if you were lining them up next to each other.

    Many of the county flags are a bit busy or dizzying in colour, but I think that makes them more distintive and appealing.
    Of course few are aware of them and fewer use them, good or bad, as it is a bit late to try to develop (or overdevelop) a sense of county identiy the way US States can. Outside of Yorkshire anyway.

    But i fly my bustard flag with pride.
    You missed one…
    Also hideous. The attempt to create an Isle of Wight shaped diamond just doesn’t work. It looks like a 90s tv identity, presumably for a regional news programme.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,002

    Good evening

    There is a definite negative shift in the polls against the conservatives and I would put it down to the terrible local election results highlighting just how unpopular they are

    They are tired and frankly looking defeated, and going into opposition is the best way for them to regroup as long as it is as a one nation conservative party otherwise many wilderness years beckon

    Having said that all the serious issues will still be present and Starmer/ Labour will face many hard years ahead as there are no simple and easy answers

    There are simple and easy answers, its just that they are neither electorally popular nor quick to implement, so instead voters get sucked in to cheap and empty promises.
    Fair comment

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,083

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    I do, like the chap in the video, kind of mark down what might be reasonable designs (on the basis some of the seals are good), due to being too similar to one another if you were lining them up next to each other.

    Many of the county flags are a bit busy or dizzying in colour, but I think that makes them more distintive and appealing.
    Of course few are aware of them and fewer use them, good or bad, as it is a bit late to try to develop (or overdevelop) a sense of county identiy the way US States can. Outside of Yorkshire anyway.

    But i fly my bustard flag with pride.
    You missed one…
    Also hideous. The attempt to create an Isle of Wight shaped diamond just doesn’t work. It looks like a 90s tv identity, presumably for a regional news programme.
    It was the winner in a competition to replace this, the old one….
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    IanB2 said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Farooq said:

    The Arizona flag is one ugly mf

    I love it. Distinctive, colourful, simple.

    And believe you me, there are a lot worse flags in the Union

    DOES YOUR FLAG FAIL? Grey Grades The State Flags!

    (I like the base rules set for the video - keep it simple, distinct, no tiny details, don'g go overboard on colours unless you know what you're doing, try to be symbolic, do not use words, and definitely don't write your name on it)

    New Mexico, Utah are good. Wyoming's almost is.

    State pride seems to be pretty good in the USA, so I'm surprised so many just stuck with their state seal on a blue background.
    I actually think the US state flags are all pretty good, with the possible exception of Colorado.

    The English county flags, most of which have been designed and adopted in the past several years, are sometimes pretty awful.
    I do, like the chap in the video, kind of mark down what might be reasonable designs (on the basis some of the seals are good), due to being too similar to one another if you were lining them up next to each other.

    Many of the county flags are a bit busy or dizzying in colour, but I think that makes them more distintive and appealing.
    Of course few are aware of them and fewer use them, good or bad, as it is a bit late to try to develop (or overdevelop) a sense of county identiy the way US States can. Outside of Yorkshire anyway.

    But i fly my bustard flag with pride.
    You missed one…
    Also hideous. The attempt to create an Isle of Wight shaped diamond just doesn’t work. It looks like a 90s tv identity, presumably for a regional news programme.
    It's a little too lacking in colour compared to the others. But it is simple to identify, it's symbolism of the island and waves is obvious the instant it is seen - a bit more effort than 'eh, just use the seal'.

    Which, again, is weird, since americans care more about their states by and large than even the denizens of the Isle of Wight I would guess.
This discussion has been closed.