Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Why I’m not convinced by LAB’S double digit poll leads – politicalbetting.com

24567

Comments

  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,653

    Good morning all on this lovely sunny day from lovely Liverpool.

    It's a good job I'm not travelling around Liverpool today, because I suspect the crowds are going to be horrific.

    Oh wait.... I am.

    It's going to be a fusching shit show in town today....................

    Grey and boring in London this morning!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139

    Twitter, free speech, and animal torture videos

    New Tory campaign slogan? Seems a bit out there.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,024
    Carnyx said:

    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Snip...

    It does feel utterly absurd to think that a defeat on the scale of 1997 is remotely on the agenda. But the comparable polling numbers are in that ballpark, and "not many voters are actually switching, the don't knows are shy Tories who will back us on the day" was a cope trope of the time.

    After Truss I think it would be absurd for the electorate not to give the Tories a deserved drubbing. People need boundaries and discipline, and if the electorate don't provide those to the Tories then they will simply go further off the rails.

    But, well, we live in absurd times, and Starmer is, perhaps, unbearably tedious.
    The other way of looking at this is that the Truss debacle was very swiftly corrected. Labour subjected us to Corbyn for 4 years.
    Otoh the Johnson debacle lasted a bit longer.
    Yeah but the voters wanted it. And he remained popular for a long time.
    I don't get why labour don't focus more on this 'Truss cost us 100 billion' meme a bit more. Feels like a missed opportunity to me.
    Some more unhappy bunnies coming ...

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/13/soaring-interest-rates-to-cost-uk-mortgage-holders-12bn-in-extra-payments

    'More than 1.6 million homeowners are expected to re-finance the fixed rate loans this year, forcing them to pay an average £2,300 extra a year in interest payments. [...]

    Richer households with expensive houses and large loans will pay the bulk of the extra cost. “However, the scale of the living standards shock will be greatest for those low-and-middle income households who are affected,” the foundation said.

    Repayments will increase by more than 4% of income for mortgage payers in the bottom 20% to 40% income group, compared with just 2% for those in the top 20%.'
    This is a critical factor in the next GE. It’s why I think the Tories are doomed.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,959

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    I could kind of get into Eurovision pre the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia breaking up. Now its just too many countries and too long for a casual watcher to get into it.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,789

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    For comparison, the YouGov polling on the coronation was

    A great deal: 11%
    A fair amount: 24%
    Not very much: 31%
    Not at all: 31%

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1654147039054135297
    I care more about Eurovision than I do about the coronation.

    Interesting that countries have and look to leave the monarchy but more nations want to join Eurovision.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,745
    FF43 said:

    With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.

    For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns over this.

    On the other hand, some more Tory-leaning posters will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.

    It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be completely and comprehensively.

    I think Starmer will tack socially conservative as that's where he sees Labour's political advantage. He has committed to balancing the books, which he will have to stick to, I think. He does appear to be somewhat authoritarian, maybe not surprising as a former DPP, but his background in law is in human rights, so I suspect he won't junk that entirely.

    I suggest three areas where he might diverge significantly from Sunak: 1. worker's rights; 2. more support for childcare and families generally; 3. building houses

    The third one is interesting. I don't think he's spelt it out but he has two pledges that imply a lot more house building: affordable homes and growing the economy.
    On housing, Starmer is definitely showing some ankle;

    Labour will pledge to restore housebuilding targets and hand more power to local authorities; promise 70 per cent home ownership and hundreds of thousands of new council homes. Given the resistance of so many local authorities to development, that may sound like a contradiction in terms. But I’m told a Starmer government would wield both carrot and stick: councils would be made to work together to come up with plans for development at a regional level, spreading a burden few want to shoulder individually, with cash and infrastructure as the prize for new housing. (Bafflingly, they are under no obligation to work together now.) If proposed developments meet the standards set out in those local plans, they will be approved. So no longer would each town hall have to agree to what one senior Labour source calls “shitty speculative developments” to meet targets arbitrarily imposed upon them. But nor will they be allowed to opt out of building either.

    https://twitter.com/patrickkmaguire/status/1652951851594141697

    And if Starmer's likely electoral coalition can't face down the Nimby-rentier tendency in the UK, we're all really stuffed.

  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,753
    .

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    Thanks. That's amazing, and even younger people couldn't care less either. R4 Today should stick to politics, hard news, Beethoven's late quartets and interesting people.

  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited May 2023

    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.

    For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns on this.

    On the other hand, some Tories will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.

    It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be, completely and comprehensively.

    It would be silly to expect things to get much better. Indeed I am merely expecting a further slow deterioriation in the quality of government instead of the turbo charged collapse we have had since Boris and co took over the once conservative party.
    Much though I expect a Labour government to be awful, I'd probably rather a Labour majority than see them propped up by the LDs or SNP, or, God help us, Greens.
    Well the Greens will get between 0 and 3 MPs, with 1 odds on. You don't need to worry about that.

    LDs will get 25-35 and were actually good in government in the coalition, if unpopular and electorally naive.

    SNP is an interesting one, with their vote efficiency collapsing in the 30-35% range. If the combination of a likely Labour PM rather than another Tory one, combines with the internal division and imploding of the SNP, which seems very plausible to me as an outsider, then they could cease to be a Westminster force and end up on 10 or so seats with little influence.
    They were good in the last coalition. But my impression is that they've changed quite a bit since then. At best, it will be a coalotion of nothing-gets-done. Which I concede is not massively different from what we have at present.
    Quite a few of us would be delighted if the govt could manage nothing gets done. Instead we have had years of creating needless divisions in society and dismantling our institutions, both the opposite of conservative.
    Yes, they've been on a wrecking, provocative, "disruptuve", and "creative destruction" binge, partly influenced by the Trumpist times, and now a number of Tories have realised that that's not been successful.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,959

    Carnyx said:

    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Snip...

    It does feel utterly absurd to think that a defeat on the scale of 1997 is remotely on the agenda. But the comparable polling numbers are in that ballpark, and "not many voters are actually switching, the don't knows are shy Tories who will back us on the day" was a cope trope of the time.

    After Truss I think it would be absurd for the electorate not to give the Tories a deserved drubbing. People need boundaries and discipline, and if the electorate don't provide those to the Tories then they will simply go further off the rails.

    But, well, we live in absurd times, and Starmer is, perhaps, unbearably tedious.
    The other way of looking at this is that the Truss debacle was very swiftly corrected. Labour subjected us to Corbyn for 4 years.
    Otoh the Johnson debacle lasted a bit longer.
    Yeah but the voters wanted it. And he remained popular for a long time.
    I don't get why labour don't focus more on this 'Truss cost us 100 billion' meme a bit more. Feels like a missed opportunity to me.
    Some more unhappy bunnies coming ...

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/13/soaring-interest-rates-to-cost-uk-mortgage-holders-12bn-in-extra-payments

    'More than 1.6 million homeowners are expected to re-finance the fixed rate loans this year, forcing them to pay an average £2,300 extra a year in interest payments. [...]

    Richer households with expensive houses and large loans will pay the bulk of the extra cost. “However, the scale of the living standards shock will be greatest for those low-and-middle income households who are affected,” the foundation said.

    Repayments will increase by more than 4% of income for mortgage payers in the bottom 20% to 40% income group, compared with just 2% for those in the top 20%.'
    This is a critical factor in the next GE. It’s why I think the Tories are doomed.
    Household finance generally. Its not just homeowners, indeed they may be better protected than most.

    Some seem to think inflation dropping back from 10% to 5% will make a magical difference. In the real world of a struggling household if you are already going deeper into debt each month before prices rise by a further 5% and then hear Tory ministers on TV boasting about inflation being cut in half you are unlikely to rush out and vote Tory.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,589
    I am not convinced by this overwhelming wave of hatred that @Heathener reports on a daily basis but there is no doubt that the local election results cut deep into the Tory muscle and bone, the fat having been cut away in the last round. These were terrible local election results by any measure and the Tories were lucky that they disappeared from the headlines so quickly thanks to the Coronation.

    But anything short of panic in CCHQ would be inappropriate. They need to work hard at delivering promises over the next year (anything after that will be too late) and hope and pray that the economy comes around in time. They have the advantage of incumbency, they have a lot of public money as a result, they need to work their cotton socks off if they want to have a job in 2025. Many of them, probably at least 70, won't. And it could be a lot worse.

    A Labour majority requires a bigger swing that Cameron managed in 2010. I remain to be convinced that SKS is capable of that. But its likely to be close.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139
    Heathener said:

    This meme was ridiculed on last night's Have I Got News for You, described as the Conservatives' clutching at straws:


    Didnt Corbyn's people used to claim things would turn out ok because non voters would turn out for them or something? Rather overlooking that non voters generally, well, dont vote?

    The Tories do have a chance, but they seem be reliant on things being exactly as they'd like with the economy, opposition, and their own former voters.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,401

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    I haven't noticed it. I never watch anything live bar sport and record everything else do I scroll past all the crap. You can watch a lot more too.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,436
    I suppose one way to deal with the red Tory patter is to lean right into it.


  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    For comparison, the YouGov polling on the coronation was

    A great deal: 11%
    A fair amount: 24%
    Not very much: 31%
    Not at all: 31%

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1654147039054135297
    I care more about Eurovision than I do about the coronation.

    Interesting that countries have and look to leave the monarchy but more nations want to join Eurovision.
    Nations are keen to join an annual singing competition. Other nations think of making changes to their constitutional arrangements. I think even for the most diehard Republicans would struggle to connect those things so well done for effort I guess.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,054
    edited May 2023

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    I could kind of get into Eurovision pre the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia breaking up. Now its just too many countries and too long for a casual watcher to get into it.
    Hence the semifinals etc.

    It's just a bit of fun, on what is otherwise a gairly grey and grim spring.
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,897
    kle4 said:

    FF43 said:

    With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.

    For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns over this.

    On the other hand, some more Tory-leaning posters will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.

    It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be completely and comprehensively.

    I think Starmer will tack socially conservative as that's where he sees Labour's political advantage. He has committed to balancing the books, which he will have to stick to, I think. He does appear to be somewhat authoritarian, maybe not surprising as a former DPP, but his background in law is in human rights, so I suspect he won't junk that entirely.

    I suggest three areas where he might diverge significantly from Sunak: 1. worker's rights; 2. more support for childcare and families generally; 3. building houses

    The third one is interesting. I don't think he's spelt it out but he has two pledges that imply a lot more house building: affordable homes and growing the economy.
    If a pledge merely implies something that implication can safely be ignored as meaningless.

    A direct pledge will often fail but at least usually shows intent.
    Housebuilding is one of very few levers that Starmer has to deliver two of his pledges. Which is why I expect him to use it.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,024

    Carnyx said:

    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Snip...

    It does feel utterly absurd to think that a defeat on the scale of 1997 is remotely on the agenda. But the comparable polling numbers are in that ballpark, and "not many voters are actually switching, the don't knows are shy Tories who will back us on the day" was a cope trope of the time.

    After Truss I think it would be absurd for the electorate not to give the Tories a deserved drubbing. People need boundaries and discipline, and if the electorate don't provide those to the Tories then they will simply go further off the rails.

    But, well, we live in absurd times, and Starmer is, perhaps, unbearably tedious.
    The other way of looking at this is that the Truss debacle was very swiftly corrected. Labour subjected us to Corbyn for 4 years.
    Otoh the Johnson debacle lasted a bit longer.
    Yeah but the voters wanted it. And he remained popular for a long time.
    I don't get why labour don't focus more on this 'Truss cost us 100 billion' meme a bit more. Feels like a missed opportunity to me.
    Some more unhappy bunnies coming ...

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/13/soaring-interest-rates-to-cost-uk-mortgage-holders-12bn-in-extra-payments

    'More than 1.6 million homeowners are expected to re-finance the fixed rate loans this year, forcing them to pay an average £2,300 extra a year in interest payments. [...]

    Richer households with expensive houses and large loans will pay the bulk of the extra cost. “However, the scale of the living standards shock will be greatest for those low-and-middle income households who are affected,” the foundation said.

    Repayments will increase by more than 4% of income for mortgage payers in the bottom 20% to 40% income group, compared with just 2% for those in the top 20%.'
    This is a critical factor in the next GE. It’s why I think the Tories are doomed.
    Household finance generally. Its not just homeowners, indeed they may be better protected than most.

    Some seem to think inflation dropping back from 10% to 5% will make a magical difference. In the real world of a struggling household if you are already going deeper into debt each month before prices rise by a further 5% and then hear Tory ministers on TV boasting about inflation being cut in half you are unlikely to rush out and vote Tory.
    Yes, but why I think they’re a critical group is that they are natural Tory voters who will be switching to the ABC candidate.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited May 2023

    I suppose one way to deal with the red Tory patter is to lean right into it.


    Yes, this is kind of rhetoric is going a bit too far for me, but I expect it will solidify some socially conservative support in places like the Red Wall or the countryside, so I expect it will do the trick that Starmer is wanting.

    It does leave me increasingly concerned about some of the precedents he's setting for government from an authoritarian rather than economic point of view though, if this isn't just fluff . If I were the LD's, I'd try very hard to capitalise from a liberal point of view.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,707
    kle4 said:

    I'm convinced by the poll leads.

    The Tories are still immersed in internal civil war or staying home in a strop, and the number of positive developments occurring for them could be counted on ome hand. Divided opposition is much less impactful and Labour are not outright off putting, so are seerping up support.

    If delivering to turn things around was easy the Tories would have managed it by now. And the internal bitterness between factions, or aura of resignation, prevents delivery.

    Right, so it's not the shitty Government that's at fault, it's the people pointing out that the Government is shitty. I think there's a recent neologism describing that sort of argument.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139

    FF43 said:

    With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.

    For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns over this.

    On the other hand, some more Tory-leaning posters will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.

    It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be completely and comprehensively.

    I think Starmer will tack socially conservative as that's where he sees Labour's political advantage. He has committed to balancing the books, which he will have to stick to, I think. He does appear to be somewhat authoritarian, maybe not surprising as a former DPP, but his background in law is in human rights, so I suspect he won't junk that entirely.

    I suggest three areas where he might diverge significantly from Sunak: 1. worker's rights; 2. more support for childcare and families generally; 3. building houses

    The third one is interesting. I don't think he's spelt it out but he has two pledges that imply a lot more house building: affordable homes and growing the economy.
    On housing, Starmer is definitely showing some ankle;

    Labour will pledge to restore housebuilding targets and hand more power to local authorities; promise 70 per cent home ownership and hundreds of thousands of new council homes. Given the resistance of so many local authorities to development, that may sound like a contradiction in terms. But I’m told a Starmer government would wield both carrot and stick: councils would be made to work together to come up with plans for development at a regional level, spreading a burden few want to shoulder individually, with cash and infrastructure as the prize for new housing. (Bafflingly, they are under no obligation to work together now.) If proposed developments meet the standards set out in those local plans, they will be approved. So no longer would each town hall have to agree to what one senior Labour source calls “shitty speculative developments” to meet targets arbitrarily imposed upon them. But nor will they be allowed to opt out of building either.

    https://twitter.com/patrickkmaguire/status/1652951851594141697

    And if Starmer's likely electoral coalition can't face down the Nimby-rentier tendency in the UK, we're all really stuffed.

    That quote looks like a whole load of nothing to me. Targets back would help, but plans taking absolute years to develop is a major problem before trying to get multiple authorities to agree, and it seems contradictory since they will try to opt out because they'll claim developments dont meet the standards of plans, requiring appeals - no different to now.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,613

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    I haven't noticed it. I never watch anything live bar sport and record everything else do I scroll past all the crap. You can watch a lot more too.
    They're also going overboard on billboard advertising. Which really riles. You've already got my money, fuckers, you don't need to advertise.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,327

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    I haven't noticed it. I never watch anything live bar sport and record everything else do I scroll past all the crap. You can watch a lot more too.
    Mrs J didn't even know it was on!

    I'm really not into Eurovision, and haven't watched it in decades. I'd much rather curl up on the sofa to watch a good box set. But if other people get their kicks from it, fair enough.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,479
    DavidL said:

    I am not convinced by this overwhelming wave of hatred that @Heathener reports on a daily basis but there is no doubt that the local election results cut deep into the Tory muscle and bone, the fat having been cut away in the last round. These were terrible local election results by any measure and the Tories were lucky that they disappeared from the headlines so quickly thanks to the Coronation.

    But anything short of panic in CCHQ would be inappropriate. They need to work hard at delivering promises over the next year (anything after that will be too late) and hope and pray that the economy comes around in time. They have the advantage of incumbency, they have a lot of public money as a result, they need to work their cotton socks off if they want to have a job in 2025. Many of them, probably at least 70, won't. And it could be a lot worse.

    A Labour majority requires a bigger swing that Cameron managed in 2010. I remain to be convinced that SKS is capable of that. But its likely to be close.

    There is an element of hyperbole in Heathener's posts. But the crux of her point feels valid - more people are sick to the back teeth of the Tories than the people who either aren't or are indifferent. This allows for any and all anecdote examples of "well I'm not hearing this" to be valid depending on whom you are mixing with.

    Your middle paragraph details their problems:
    "work hard at delivering promises" - some of the promises are the thing that drive people away from voting Tory. Not that they are remotely able to deliver them anyway
    "pray that the economy comes round" - the reduction in the rate of inflation being prayed for won't make everyone feel better off
    "a lot of public money" - not that people are seeing. Services visibly crumbling, towns and cities dirty and dishevelled due to bankrupt councils, little investment - most of which appears to be corruptly going into certain pockets not on *stuff*

    The kicker for the Tories is that we live in a country which to most normals appears to be broken down, shabby, nasty and corrupt. Even if inflation does drop by half nobody will feel better off now that the £10 jar of coffee is here to stay, nor will they appreciate Tory mince sneering at them for not feeling better off as they keep insisting they are.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,266

    Cookie said:

    With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.

    For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns on this.

    On the other hand, some Tories will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.

    It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be, completely and comprehensively.

    It would be silly to expect things to get much better. Indeed I am merely expecting a further slow deterioriation in the quality of government instead of the turbo charged collapse we have had since Boris and co took over the once conservative party.
    Much though I expect a Labour government to be awful, I'd probably rather a Labour majority than see them propped up by the LDs or SNP, or, God help us, Greens.
    Can see that with SNP or Greens, but LDs would be good I think. Contrast for example, the Tories on the whole productive coalition with the disastrous consequences of their dependency on the DUP.
    We had enough with the Lib Dems being Tory poodles last time.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,736
    edited May 2023

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    For comparison, the YouGov polling on the coronation was

    A great deal: 11%
    A fair amount: 24%
    Not very much: 31%
    Not at all: 31%

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1654147039054135297
    I care more about Eurovision than I do about the coronation.

    Interesting that countries have and look to leave the monarchy but more nations want to join Eurovision.
    I don't take any interest in Eurovision, but l love the fact that people do and have a great time. Jealous, but can't put myself through all the crap music. Wish I liked it but I don't. Missing out.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,357
    Cookie said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    I haven't noticed it. I never watch anything live bar sport and record everything else do I scroll past all the crap. You can watch a lot more too.
    They're also going overboard on billboard advertising. Which really riles. You've already got my money, fuckers, you don't need to advertise.
    "Thanks to the unique way we're funded, we can really rub it in your face."
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,539

    With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.

    For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns on this.

    On the other hand, some Tories will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.

    It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be, completely and comprehensively.

    It would be silly to expect things to get much better. Indeed I am merely expecting a further slow deterioriation in the quality of government instead of the turbo charged collapse we have had since Boris and co took over the once conservative party.
    I'm sure the (new) Labour government will be more judicious and competent than anything we've had from the Tories in recent years. What would be silly, imo, is expecting a radical improvement to our economic prospects. That's unrealistic. I don't think politicians can do this although they have to pretend they can. What they can do, however, is avoid stupidity and self-harm, run things well, have some integrity, try to reduce the gap between rich and poor, and I'm reasonably bullish on this score.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,266

    Good morning all on this lovely sunny day from lovely Liverpool.

    It's a good job I'm not travelling around Liverpool today, because I suspect the crowds are going to be horrific.

    Oh wait.... I am.

    It's going to be a fusching shit show in town today....................

    Grey and boring in London this morning!
    sunshine in Ayrshire, yet again
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139
    edited May 2023
    rcs1000 said:

    Heathener said:

    And this tory trope that these are mid-terms are hilarious. There is a maximum 16 months until the next General Election is called.

    People are VERY focused. They want to give the tories an absolute kicking.

    I was thinking they might scrape 200 seats but with the current trajectory they might not make 100. Probably between 100 and 150 but a lot depends on whether Sunak stays. People are starting to see him for what he is: an out of touch mega rich schoolboy.

    That's not quite right: it could be called in late December 2024, which is 19 months away.
    If they wait up to then they are on course for 100-150.

    If they go in the autumn I reckon they will be on course for 175-225.

    If they go in the spring or summer they will think they will get 275-315 but I reckon max out at 250, 200-250.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,959
    Foxy said:

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    I could kind of get into Eurovision pre the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia breaking up. Now its just too many countries and too long for a casual watcher to get into it.
    Hence the semifinals etc.

    It's just a bit of fun, on what is otherwise a gairly grey and grim spring.
    In the spirit of Brexit, why not do a British Isles regional one? Manchester and Liverpool deserve their own slot from legacy then London, Ireland, Scotland, Yorkshire, Wales, South West, East and West Midlands and the North East. Home Counties deliberately excluded as don't produce enough good music but can be the judges as they are often quite judgey.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,479
    kle4 said:

    Heathener said:

    This meme was ridiculed on last night's Have I Got News for You, described as the Conservatives' clutching at straws:


    Didnt Corbyn's people used to claim things would turn out ok because non voters would turn out for them or something? Rather overlooking that non voters generally, well, dont vote?

    The Tories do have a chance, but they seem be reliant on things being exactly as they'd like with the economy, opposition, and their own former voters.
    Non-voters turned out alright. To vote Brexit. Then to Get Brexit Done. They hadn't been seen before, they haven't been seen since. What hard left cranks got wrong was simple - the Casino fallacy. Which is this is what I think, I am right, therefore everyone else is wrong. Watching Jezbollah fanatics arguing on the doorstep with voters marked LLLLLLLLL all the way across the contact sheet, finger jabbing at them in anger was something to behold.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,327
    I've no idea if this is true, but if it is: LOL.

    " Russian authorities will launch construction of a village outside Moscow for conservative-minded Americans and Canadians next year, the state-run RIA Novosti news agency reported Thursday."

    https://twitter.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1656747501511122944
  • Options

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    Snip...

    It does feel utterly absurd to think that a defeat on the scale of 1997 is remotely on the agenda. But the comparable polling numbers are in that ballpark, and "not many voters are actually switching, the don't knows are shy Tories who will back us on the day" was a cope trope of the time.

    After Truss I think it would be absurd for the electorate not to give the Tories a deserved drubbing. People need boundaries and discipline, and if the electorate don't provide those to the Tories then they will simply go further off the rails.

    But, well, we live in absurd times, and Starmer is, perhaps, unbearably tedious.
    The other way of looking at this is that the Truss debacle was very swiftly corrected. Labour subjected us to Corbyn for 4 years.
    Corbyn never cost us a penny in 4 years , whereas Truss cost us circa 100 billion in a few days
    Ludicrous!
    I reckon she cost me about 30 grand. Her
    and her clown chancellor's comedy budget came a week after we put our house on the market. It killed interest in the market, when properties similar to ours had gone for a premium only a couple of months before. I've had to put my new downhill bike on hold. Heart breaking!
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,479

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    I haven't noticed it. I never watch anything live bar sport and record everything else do I scroll past all the crap. You can watch a lot more too.
    Mrs J didn't even know it was on!

    I'm really not into Eurovision, and haven't watched it in decades. I'd much rather curl up on the sofa to watch a good box set. But if other people get their kicks from it, fair enough.
    In a Teams meeting with the French yesterday, and one of the Brits mentioned Eurovision. Much gallic shrugging and laughter - "I didn't know it was on"

    Perhaps Eurovision's high camp kitch only appeals to a certain diseased mindset. I will of course be glued to it, getting merrily drunk and hosting the usual 500 post big Facebook chat with friends and acquaintances.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,460

    I suppose one way to deal with the red Tory patter is to lean right into it.


    In all seriousness it’s a fair point. Thatcher wasn’t really a conservative (small c throughout this) she was a radical monetarist. Johnson was an English nationalist.

    You could argue that to the extent that the SNP says it stands for values they say are intrinsic (egalitarianism, social welfare etc.) to Scottish society l, they are in conservative in that respect as well. So it’s a fair, and actually quite common, argument to make even from the Left.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,266

    DavidL said:

    I am not convinced by this overwhelming wave of hatred that @Heathener reports on a daily basis but there is no doubt that the local election results cut deep into the Tory muscle and bone, the fat having been cut away in the last round. These were terrible local election results by any measure and the Tories were lucky that they disappeared from the headlines so quickly thanks to the Coronation.

    But anything short of panic in CCHQ would be inappropriate. They need to work hard at delivering promises over the next year (anything after that will be too late) and hope and pray that the economy comes around in time. They have the advantage of incumbency, they have a lot of public money as a result, they need to work their cotton socks off if they want to have a job in 2025. Many of them, probably at least 70, won't. And it could be a lot worse.

    A Labour majority requires a bigger swing that Cameron managed in 2010. I remain to be convinced that SKS is capable of that. But its likely to be close.

    There is an element of hyperbole in Heathener's posts. But the crux of her point feels valid - more people are sick to the back teeth of the Tories than the people who either aren't or are indifferent. This allows for any and all anecdote examples of "well I'm not hearing this" to be valid depending on whom you are mixing with.

    Your middle paragraph details their problems:
    "work hard at delivering promises" - some of the promises are the thing that drive people away from voting Tory. Not that they are remotely able to deliver them anyway
    "pray that the economy comes round" - the reduction in the rate of inflation being prayed for won't make everyone feel better off
    "a lot of public money" - not that people are seeing. Services visibly crumbling, towns and cities dirty and dishevelled due to bankrupt councils, little investment - most of which appears to be corruptly going into certain pockets not on *stuff*

    The kicker for the Tories is that we live in a country which to most normals appears to be broken down, shabby, nasty and corrupt. Even if inflation does drop by half nobody will feel better off now that the £10 jar of coffee is here to stay, nor will they appreciate Tory mince sneering at them for not feeling better off as they keep insisting they are.
    It is hard to see wishy washy Tory lite Labour fixing anything. This crappy WFH crap which majority can never do is typical of what they will do. Be lots of hot air and they will at best be as bad as teh Tories.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited May 2023
    kinabalu said:

    With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.

    For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns on this.

    On the other hand, some Tories will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.

    It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be, completely and comprehensively.

    It would be silly to expect things to get much better. Indeed I am merely expecting a further slow deterioriation in the quality of government instead of the turbo charged collapse we have had since Boris and co took over the once conservative party.
    I'm sure the (new) Labour government will be more judicious and competent than anything we've had from the Tories in recent years. What would be silly, imo, is expecting a radical improvement to our economic prospects. That's unrealistic. I don't think politicians can do this although they have to pretend they can. What they can do, however, is avoid stupidity and self-harm, run things well, have some integrity, try to reduce the gap between rich and poor, and I'm reasonably bullish on this score.
    I think there's two possibilities ; Starmer is using a Blairite rhetoric and template to bring in what will essentially a Wilsonian administration, socially liberal and economically redistributive ; or the balance is further towards Blairism, and he really will be more authoritarian. However, I think he will still definitely and actually be more 1960s Wilsonian than Blair, whatever happens, which is still what the country needs at the moment.

    Although I have some increasing concerns about the authoritarian and civil liberties side, I'm still very hopeful overall that he might make some of the fundamental changes to Britain's economic model that are needed, particularly if people like Miliband, who have been important here, are given some freedom, room for manoeuvre and free rein.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,707
    Biden visited NI 'to ensure the Brits didn't screw around' - thanks Uncle Joe
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-65557068
  • Options

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Luckily, I'm legally not allowed to watch it. Not having a TV licence frees you up from being tempted to watch dross, and it saves you 150 odd quid. Win all round.
  • Options
    TresTres Posts: 2,275
    DavidL said:

    I am not convinced by this overwhelming wave of hatred that @Heathener reports on a daily basis but there is no doubt that the local election results cut deep into the Tory muscle and bone, the fat having been cut away in the last round. These were terrible local election results by any measure and the Tories were lucky that they disappeared from the headlines so quickly thanks to the Coronation.

    But anything short of panic in CCHQ would be inappropriate. They need to work hard at delivering promises over the next year (anything after that will be too late) and hope and pray that the economy comes around in time. They have the advantage of incumbency, they have a lot of public money as a result, they need to work their cotton socks off if they want to have a job in 2025. Many of them, probably at least 70, won't. And it could be a lot worse.

    A Labour majority requires a bigger swing that Cameron managed in 2010. I remain to be convinced that SKS is capable of that. But its likely to be close.

    Come visit the South East. The Tories even lost Chevening!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139
    edited May 2023

    kle4 said:

    I'm convinced by the poll leads.

    The Tories are still immersed in internal civil war or staying home in a strop, and the number of positive developments occurring for them could be counted on ome hand. Divided opposition is much less impactful and Labour are not outright off putting, so are seerping up support.

    If delivering to turn things around was easy the Tories would have managed it by now. And the internal bitterness between factions, or aura of resignation, prevents delivery.

    Right, so it's not the shitty Government that's at fault, it's the people pointing out that the Government is shitty. I think there's a recent neologism describing that sort of argument.
    Was this meant in reply to a different post?

    Because absolutely it's the governments fault it's in this mess. Their lack of unity or direction, and general demeanour of defeat, just hinders even an effort to turn things round, but that lack is also their fault as it's the job of a government to get a grip. They're in an internal civil war because they are failing (and that applies to the failure of the beloved Boris, who totally wanted to do differently economically, also leading to civil war - in both his and Rishis case they blame opponents, that's politics).

    If you did intend to reply to the post then I think you are seeing things.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,170
    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Heathener said:

    And this tory trope that these are mid-terms are hilarious. There is a maximum 16 months until the next General Election is called.

    People are VERY focused. They want to give the tories an absolute kicking.

    I was thinking they might scrape 200 seats but with the current trajectory they might not make 100. Probably between 100 and 150 but a lot depends on whether Sunak stays. People are starting to see him for what he is: an out of touch mega rich schoolboy.

    That's not quite right: it could be called in late December 2024, which is 19 months away.
    If they wait up to then they are on course for 100-150.

    If they go in the autumn I reckon they will be on course for 175-225.

    If they go in the spring or summer they will think they will get 275-315 but I reckon max out at 250, 200-250.
    Theoretically Sunak could do as Major did and wait until the last possible moment, January 2025.
    Grey, people struggling with bills post Christmas. Tories sub 100.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139

    FF43 said:

    With huge majorities, a separate thing worries me. Starmer may feel so secure that he can do what he likes, and he's still something of an unknown quantity.

    For me personally, the biggest danger is that he's so comfortable that he feels no compulsion to reverse some of the most egregious Tory legislation, such as the voter ID laws or repressive public order legislation. I personally still may vote LD, myself, as a result of concerns over this.

    On the other hand, some more Tory-leaning posters will be worried that he will be more left-wing than promised.

    It's quite possible that he could be economically more radical, and socially more conservative, even slightly authoritarian, or else much of this will be junked when he comes to power ; but I doubt it will be completely and comprehensively.

    I think Starmer will tack socially conservative as that's where he sees Labour's political advantage. He has committed to balancing the books, which he will have to stick to, I think. He does appear to be somewhat authoritarian, maybe not surprising as a former DPP, but his background in law is in human rights, so I suspect he won't junk that entirely.

    I suggest three areas where he might diverge significantly from Sunak: 1. worker's rights; 2. more support for childcare and families generally; 3. building houses

    The third one is interesting. I don't think he's spelt it out but he has two pledges that imply a lot more house building: affordable homes and growing the economy.
    On housing, Starmer is definitely showing some ankle;

    Labour will pledge to restore housebuilding targets and hand more power to local authorities; promise 70 per cent home ownership and hundreds of thousands of new council homes. Given the resistance of so many local authorities to development, that may sound like a contradiction in terms. But I’m told a Starmer government would wield both carrot and stick: councils would be made to work together to come up with plans for development at a regional level, spreading a burden few want to shoulder individually, with cash and infrastructure as the prize for new housing. (Bafflingly, they are under no obligation to work together now.) If proposed developments meet the standards set out in those local plans, they will be approved. So no longer would each town hall have to agree to what one senior Labour source calls “shitty speculative developments” to meet targets arbitrarily imposed upon them. But nor will they be allowed to opt out of building either.

    https://twitter.com/patrickkmaguire/status/1652951851594141697

    And if Starmer's likely electoral coalition can't face down the Nimby-rentier tendency in the UK, we're all really stuffed.

    That quote looks like a whole load of nothing to me. Targets back would help, but plans taking absolu

    kle4 said:

    Heathener said:

    This meme was ridiculed on last night's Have I Got News for You, described as the Conservatives' clutching at straws:


    Didnt Corbyn's people used to claim things would turn out ok because non voters would turn out for them or something? Rather overlooking that non voters generally, well, dont vote?

    The Tories do have a chance, but they seem be reliant on things being exactly as they'd like with the economy, opposition, and their own former voters.
    Non-voters turned out alright. To vote Brexit. Then to Get Brexit Done. They hadn't been seen before, they haven't been seen since. What hard left cranks got wrong was simple - the Casino fallacy. Which is this is what I think, I am right, therefore everyone else is wrong. Watching Jezbollah fanatics arguing on the doorstep with voters marked LLLLLLLLL all the way across the contact sheet, finger jabbing at them in anger was something to behold.
    I do know one 57 year old who voted for the first time for Brexit and did then vote in the GE. Unfortunately for the Jezziah it was not to his advantage. But as you say most returned to form.
  • Options
    mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,159

    Snip...

    It does feel utterly absurd to think that a defeat on the scale of 1997 is remotely on the agenda. But the comparable polling numbers are in that ballpark, and "not many voters are actually switching, the don't knows are shy Tories who will back us on the day" was a cope trope of the time.

    After Truss I think it would be absurd for the electorate not to give the Tories a deserved drubbing. People need boundaries and discipline, and if the electorate don't provide those to the Tories then they will simply go further off the rails.

    But, well, we live in absurd times, and Starmer is, perhaps, unbearably tedious.
    Good Morning all.

    Starmer is certainly no Blair. And Davey is no Ashdown. However Sunak doesn’t have Major’s appeal either. If the LibDems could find an Ashdown or a Kennedy they’d be doing a lot better.
    Trouble is they are fishing in a tiny pool of MPs for that leader. They are below critical mass for finding someone good.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,436
    edited May 2023
    DougSeal said:

    I suppose one way to deal with the red Tory patter is to lean right into it.


    In all seriousness it’s a fair point. Thatcher wasn’t really a conservative (small c throughout this) she was a radical monetarist. Johnson was an English nationalist.

    You could argue that to the extent that the SNP says it stands for values they say are intrinsic (egalitarianism, social welfare etc.) to Scottish society l, they are in conservative in that respect as well. So it’s a fair, and actually quite common, argument to make even from the Left.
    It's a coherent argument but is it one that voters in general are attuned to? Won't they work on a more atavistic level, ie those who tend to vote big C Conservative just say 'He's not a real Conservative' and those long term lefty anti Conservatives just say 'Look, the red Tory fecker's admitting it!'? However I accept that the motivations of red wall vioters are something of a mystery to me.

    I'm left with an unfortunate image of SKS ripping his M&S shirt off to reveal steroidal pecs and bellowing 'I'm bigger than Blair'.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,503
    edited May 2023

    DougSeal said:

    I suppose one way to deal with the red Tory patter is to lean right into it.


    In all seriousness it’s a fair point. Thatcher wasn’t really a conservative (small c throughout this) she was a radical monetarist. Johnson was an English nationalist.

    You could argue that to the extent that the SNP says it stands for values they say are intrinsic (egalitarianism, social welfare etc.) to Scottish society l, they are in conservative in that respect as well. So it’s a fair, and actually quite common, argument to make even from the Left.
    It's a coherent argument but is it one that voters in general are attuned to? Won't voters work on a more atavistic level, ie those who tend to vote big C Conservative just say 'He's not a real Conservative' and those long term lefty anti Conservatives just say 'Look, the red Tory fecker's admitting it!'? However I accept that the motivations of red wall vioters are something of a mystery to me.

    I'm left with an unfortunate image of SKS ripping his M&S shirt off to reveal steroidal pecs and bellowing 'I'm bigger than Blair'.
    It won't work in metropolitan Britain, but again, like Blair, Starmer is essentially saying to them he can take them for granted.

    As with Blair, he should be careful of that in the long-term, because taken to its conclusion it will lead to the rise of a more left-of-centre Liberal Democrat party all over again, and the gradual weakening of Labour in the cities, as happened in the 2000s.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 10,056
    edited May 2023

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    I haven't noticed it. I never watch anything live bar sport and record everything else do I scroll past all the crap. You can watch a lot more too.
    Mrs J didn't even know it was on!

    I'm really not into Eurovision, and haven't watched it in decades. I'd much rather curl up on the sofa to watch a good box set. But if other people get their kicks from it, fair enough.
    In a Teams meeting with the French yesterday, and one of the Brits mentioned Eurovision. Much gallic shrugging and laughter - "I didn't know it was on"

    Perhaps Eurovision's high camp kitch only appeals to a certain diseased mindset. I will of course be glued to it, getting merrily drunk and hosting the usual 500 post big Facebook chat with friends and acquaintances.
    I’m reporting from the front lines in Burgundy today so I can confirm it’s definitely not as popular here as in the UK, but people do know it’s on.

    The coronation on the other hand: I was just speaking to the estate agent who came to value our house for tax reasons (who has an interesting surname - see below) and he had watched and been very impressed with the coronation. Typically British he said.

    The interesting surname is Buttigieg. I mentioned he shares it with a famous US politician and he said he thinks it’s an Anglo-Maltese name. His family is originally from
    Malta where it’s still fairly common. Do we know if mayor Pete has Maltese connections?

    Pronounced bou-de-shaj in French, not dissimilar to Pete’s boo-de-jej.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139

    Biden visited NI 'to ensure the Brits didn't screw around' - thanks Uncle Joe
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-65557068

    He's performatively "Irish" in that slightly over the top way that actually Irish people might find a bit gauche, I wouldn't let it get to you.

    I might be more Irish than Biden is.
  • Options
    mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,159

    I've no idea if this is true, but if it is: LOL.

    " Russian authorities will launch construction of a village outside Moscow for conservative-minded Americans and Canadians next year, the state-run RIA Novosti news agency reported Thursday."

    https://twitter.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1656747501511122944

    Are they advertising that they are going to exfiltrate all their activated sleeper agents of the last 10 years, now they are blown? Boris helicoptered out of his Oxfordshire home like a latter day George Blake?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,054
    mwadams said:

    Snip...

    It does feel utterly absurd to think that a defeat on the scale of 1997 is remotely on the agenda. But the comparable polling numbers are in that ballpark, and "not many voters are actually switching, the don't knows are shy Tories who will back us on the day" was a cope trope of the time.

    After Truss I think it would be absurd for the electorate not to give the Tories a deserved drubbing. People need boundaries and discipline, and if the electorate don't provide those to the Tories then they will simply go further off the rails.

    But, well, we live in absurd times, and Starmer is, perhaps, unbearably tedious.
    Good Morning all.

    Starmer is certainly no Blair. And Davey is no Ashdown. However Sunak doesn’t have Major’s appeal either. If the LibDems could find an Ashdown or a Kennedy they’d be doing a lot better.
    Trouble is they are fishing in a tiny pool of MPs for that leader. They are below critical mass for finding someone good.
    I think Davey is doing a good job. Daisy looks quite a talent too as next leader.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139

    I've no idea if this is true, but if it is: LOL.

    " Russian authorities will launch construction of a village outside Moscow for conservative-minded Americans and Canadians next year, the state-run RIA Novosti news agency reported Thursday."

    https://twitter.com/highbrow_nobrow/status/1656747501511122944

    It genuinely sounds like it would be popular enough with a certain subset of American loonies (I am unfamiliar with the Canadian ones) and provide a strasy supply of english speaking guests for propaganda outlets that I can believe it's real.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,745

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Heathener said:

    And this tory trope that these are mid-terms are hilarious. There is a maximum 16 months until the next General Election is called.

    People are VERY focused. They want to give the tories an absolute kicking.

    I was thinking they might scrape 200 seats but with the current trajectory they might not make 100. Probably between 100 and 150 but a lot depends on whether Sunak stays. People are starting to see him for what he is: an out of touch mega rich schoolboy.

    That's not quite right: it could be called in late December 2024, which is 19 months away.
    If they wait up to then they are on course for 100-150.

    If they go in the autumn I reckon they will be on course for 175-225.

    If they go in the spring or summer they will think they will get 275-315 but I reckon max out at 250, 200-250.
    Theoretically Sunak could do as Major did and wait until the last possible moment, January 2025.
    Grey, people struggling with bills post Christmas. Tories sub 100.
    If there's a window where the Conservatives have a chance of staying in power, I'm confident that they will spot it and go for a quick election. If things go better than expected, that might come in Spring 2024.

    The harder question is what to do if that window never opens. When does the "sod it, we're going to lose, but if we hang on any longer, we'll just lose even more" overcome "why leave office when we don't have to yet, something might turn up"?

    The historical record (Major, Brown) is that it never does that, but they weren't faced with a last minute election campaign that would have a Christmas break.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,479
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    I am not convinced by this overwhelming wave of hatred that @Heathener reports on a daily basis but there is no doubt that the local election results cut deep into the Tory muscle and bone, the fat having been cut away in the last round. These were terrible local election results by any measure and the Tories were lucky that they disappeared from the headlines so quickly thanks to the Coronation.

    But anything short of panic in CCHQ would be inappropriate. They need to work hard at delivering promises over the next year (anything after that will be too late) and hope and pray that the economy comes around in time. They have the advantage of incumbency, they have a lot of public money as a result, they need to work their cotton socks off if they want to have a job in 2025. Many of them, probably at least 70, won't. And it could be a lot worse.

    A Labour majority requires a bigger swing that Cameron managed in 2010. I remain to be convinced that SKS is capable of that. But its likely to be close.

    There is an element of hyperbole in Heathener's posts. But the crux of her point feels valid - more people are sick to the back teeth of the Tories than the people who either aren't or are indifferent. This allows for any and all anecdote examples of "well I'm not hearing this" to be valid depending on whom you are mixing with.

    Your middle paragraph details their problems:
    "work hard at delivering promises" - some of the promises are the thing that drive people away from voting Tory. Not that they are remotely able to deliver them anyway
    "pray that the economy comes round" - the reduction in the rate of inflation being prayed for won't make everyone feel better off
    "a lot of public money" - not that people are seeing. Services visibly crumbling, towns and cities dirty and dishevelled due to bankrupt councils, little investment - most of which appears to be corruptly going into certain pockets not on *stuff*

    The kicker for the Tories is that we live in a country which to most normals appears to be broken down, shabby, nasty and corrupt. Even if inflation does drop by half nobody will feel better off now that the £10 jar of coffee is here to stay, nor will they appreciate Tory mince sneering at them for not feeling better off as they keep insisting they are.
    It is hard to see wishy washy Tory lite Labour fixing anything. This crappy WFH crap which majority can never do is typical of what they will do. Be lots of hot air and they will at best be as bad as teh Tories.
    I'm not voting Labour. Even if all that Starmer does is stop Tory spiv stealing our money and stop everything looking broken and shabby, he'll be worth it. Bigger reforms are needed - he says so too. That needs cross-party support so bring the other non-Tory parties in as well.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 5,112
    I have no problem with the wall to wall BBC coverage of Eurovision .

    Liverpool has put on a great show so far , people are joyful and it’s been a great advert for the city .

    Seeing people from all over Europe together and the crazy outfits is just lovely.



  • Options
    stjohnstjohn Posts: 1,780
    Foxy said:

    mwadams said:

    Snip...

    It does feel utterly absurd to think that a defeat on the scale of 1997 is remotely on the agenda. But the comparable polling numbers are in that ballpark, and "not many voters are actually switching, the don't knows are shy Tories who will back us on the day" was a cope trope of the time.

    After Truss I think it would be absurd for the electorate not to give the Tories a deserved drubbing. People need boundaries and discipline, and if the electorate don't provide those to the Tories then they will simply go further off the rails.

    But, well, we live in absurd times, and Starmer is, perhaps, unbearably tedious.
    Good Morning all.

    Starmer is certainly no Blair. And Davey is no Ashdown. However Sunak doesn’t have Major’s appeal either. If the LibDems could find an Ashdown or a Kennedy they’d be doing a lot better.
    Trouble is they are fishing in a tiny pool of MPs for that leader. They are below critical mass for finding someone good.
    I think Davey is doing a good job. Daisy looks quite a talent too as next leader.
    Yes. They both come over well and are articulate. But they need more media exposure. Perhaps get them both on Newsnight for a Lib Dem Q&A session.

    "Davey, Daisy give me your answer do ...."
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139

    kle4 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Heathener said:

    And this tory trope that these are mid-terms are hilarious. There is a maximum 16 months until the next General Election is called.

    People are VERY focused. They want to give the tories an absolute kicking.

    I was thinking they might scrape 200 seats but with the current trajectory they might not make 100. Probably between 100 and 150 but a lot depends on whether Sunak stays. People are starting to see him for what he is: an out of touch mega rich schoolboy.

    That's not quite right: it could be called in late December 2024, which is 19 months away.
    If they wait up to then they are on course for 100-150.

    If they go in the autumn I reckon they will be on course for 175-225.

    If they go in the spring or summer they will think they will get 275-315 but I reckon max out at 250, 200-250.
    Theoretically Sunak could do as Major did and wait until the last possible moment, January 2025.
    Grey, people struggling with bills post Christmas. Tories sub 100.
    When does the "sod it, we're going to lose, but if we hang on any longer, we'll just lose even more" overcome "why leave office when we don't have to yet, something might turn up"?
    25 October 2024. The two year anniversary of Rishi becoming PM.

    And happy 43rd birthday yesterday to Mr Sunak.

    44 years old and he'll be a retired PM, remarkable.

  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,053
    Mr. kle4, Alexander was over a decade younger when he died. And Pitt the Younger only a few years older.

    Be interesting to see if he hangs around, though.
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,479

    On topic, I disagree with Mike. That 16% now backing Lab is huge - and runs very counter to a long period where there was almost no net Con-Lab swing (leads being the result more of swings within left-of-centre / right-of-centre blocks, and DKs/WNVs etc).

    It's worth noting that 20% of 2019 LDs and 11% of 2019 Lab voters are also saying DK, so any return-to-base effect will be significantly mitigated by those voters coming home too.

    However, Johnson's 2019 coalition was flaky. While some hard-left activists will have been repelled by Starmer and are now confirmed Green/TUSC/Breakthrough/whatever, their number will be small. By contrast, there were many more first-time Con voters then who will have been put off sufficiently by Boris/Truss/the Tories in general that those really are now lost votes.

    The comparison with 1992-97 is worth making. Labour's vote only went up by 2m between the two elections, while the Tory vote dropped by 4.5m (the LD one fell by 750k, despite more than doubling their MPs). I could well see something similar happening, with many current ex-Con/DKs just sitting it out.

    Great to be replying to one of your comments again!

    I agree, and your point about the other party vote dropping is one that some activists miss. It isn't all about your vote, or winning votes across from the other lot. You can be relatively stable and either be swamped by an increase o the other side, or left comfortably winning by them falling away.

    For all that Jezbollah cultists foam on about their vote increase in 2017, they never talk about the +2.3m added to the Tory tally from 2015. 20% more votes for the governing party means you lose, regardless of what you do.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913

    On topic, I disagree with Mike. That 16% now backing Lab is huge - and runs very counter to a long period where there was almost no net Con-Lab swing (leads being the result more of swings within left-of-centre / right-of-centre blocks, and DKs/WNVs etc).

    It's worth noting that 20% of 2019 LDs and 11% of 2019 Lab voters are also saying DK, so any return-to-base effect will be significantly mitigated by those voters coming home too.

    However, Johnson's 2019 coalition was flaky. While some hard-left activists will have been repelled by Starmer and are now confirmed Green/TUSC/Breakthrough/whatever, their number will be small. By contrast, there were many more first-time Con voters then who will have been put off sufficiently by Boris/Truss/the Tories in general that those really are now lost votes.

    The comparison with 1992-97 is worth making. Labour's vote only went up by 2m between the two elections, while the Tory vote dropped by 4.5m (the LD one fell by 750k, despite more than doubling their MPs). I could well see something similar happening, with many current ex-Con/DKs just sitting it out.

    It’s great to see you posting again. One signal that the Tories are back on track would be you returning to the fold, any thoughts of that?
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,466
    I should have added, there's a chart I find interesting in the tweet below that plots local NEV share against the contemporary GE VI polling. Last week's election results implied polling of almost exactly where it in fact was (it's maybe ticked up a couple of points since).

    In other words, that ~15% Lab lead is real and rooted in hard votes.

    Now, as we've been told many times, polls are a snapshot not a prediction. Just because Labour is mid-teens up now it doesn't mean they will be come the election (indeed, it doesn't even mean they would be mid-teens up if there was a GE tomorrow; polls have been known to be wrong). A lot can happen in 12-18 months. But that's a different point - whether or not Labour will retain the landslide-delivering lead they have now isn't the issue. The issue is whether they currently have one. And they do.

    https://twitter.com/Beyond_Topline/status/1654174876754640903
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,694

    On topic, I disagree with Mike. That 16% now backing Lab is huge - and runs very counter to a long period where there was almost no net Con-Lab swing (leads being the result more of swings within left-of-centre / right-of-centre blocks, and DKs/WNVs etc).

    It's worth noting that 20% of 2019 LDs and 11% of 2019 Lab voters are also saying DK, so any return-to-base effect will be significantly mitigated by those voters coming home too.

    However, Johnson's 2019 coalition was flaky. While some hard-left activists will have been repelled by Starmer and are now confirmed Green/TUSC/Breakthrough/whatever, their number will be small. By contrast, there were many more first-time Con voters then who will have been put off sufficiently by Boris/Truss/the Tories in general that those really are now lost votes.

    The comparison with 1992-97 is worth making. Labour's vote only went up by 2m between the two elections, while the Tory vote dropped by 4.5m (the LD one fell by 750k, despite more than doubling their MPs). I could well see something similar happening, with many current ex-Con/DKs just sitting it out.

    Excellent points to think about, beautifully put.

    The only thinking I can add would be polling that shows opposition ahead of government on every issue, including Ukraine and immigration. Some big leads on area’s the voters say are top of their list. PMs are supposed to have inbuilt advantage on preferred PM, but Starmer’s ahead. Labour ahead on the economic questions too.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,436
    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,959
    So to summarise todays thread, ABC voters are going to win two election majorities in a row. Nothing to do with social class, but Anyone But Corbyn in 2019 and Anyone But Conservatives in 2024.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,653

    Got my first bus of the holiday today..


    Isn't that a rip-off of the one in Cornwall? :lol:
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    Jonathan said:

    On topic, I disagree with Mike. That 16% now backing Lab is huge - and runs very counter to a long period where there was almost no net Con-Lab swing (leads being the result more of swings within left-of-centre / right-of-centre blocks, and DKs/WNVs etc).

    It's worth noting that 20% of 2019 LDs and 11% of 2019 Lab voters are also saying DK, so any return-to-base effect will be significantly mitigated by those voters coming home too.

    However, Johnson's 2019 coalition was flaky. While some hard-left activists will have been repelled by Starmer and are now confirmed Green/TUSC/Breakthrough/whatever, their number will be small. By contrast, there were many more first-time Con voters then who will have been put off sufficiently by Boris/Truss/the Tories in general that those really are now lost votes.

    The comparison with 1992-97 is worth making. Labour's vote only went up by 2m between the two elections, while the Tory vote dropped by 4.5m (the LD one fell by 750k, despite more than doubling their MPs). I could well see something similar happening, with many current ex-Con/DKs just sitting it out.

    It’s great to see you posting again. One signal that the Tories are back on track would be you returning to the fold, any thoughts of that?
    Yes, very much welcome back too.

    On topic, I wonder if there isn't a bit of bias to surprise in media coverage, but even among punters looking for a good bet. I think the electorate have made a fairly settled decision that they want a change of government and Starmer seems OK, and it will take something dramatic (which is always possible) to change that.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,255
    edited May 2023
    It's not impossible for Labour to win by 10% and still fall short of an overall majority. Very unlikely.

    (In 1992 the Tories won by 7.6% and only just won an ov maj, dependent on 10 seats with very small majorities). Labour's vote today is probably more concentrated in certain areas than the Tories' was in 1992.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913

    Jonathan said:

    On topic, I disagree with Mike. That 16% now backing Lab is huge - and runs very counter to a long period where there was almost no net Con-Lab swing (leads being the result more of swings within left-of-centre / right-of-centre blocks, and DKs/WNVs etc).

    It's worth noting that 20% of 2019 LDs and 11% of 2019 Lab voters are also saying DK, so any return-to-base effect will be significantly mitigated by those voters coming home too.

    However, Johnson's 2019 coalition was flaky. While some hard-left activists will have been repelled by Starmer and are now confirmed Green/TUSC/Breakthrough/whatever, their number will be small. By contrast, there were many more first-time Con voters then who will have been put off sufficiently by Boris/Truss/the Tories in general that those really are now lost votes.

    The comparison with 1992-97 is worth making. Labour's vote only went up by 2m between the two elections, while the Tory vote dropped by 4.5m (the LD one fell by 750k, despite more than doubling their MPs). I could well see something similar happening, with many current ex-Con/DKs just sitting it out.

    It’s great to see you posting again. One signal that the Tories are back on track would be you returning to the fold, any thoughts of that?
    No chance. I'm happy in the Yorkshire Party and have no desire to return to the toxic brew that is, and is very likely to remain, the Tory Party over the next 7-10 years, at least.

    Besides, there's no place for a vocal Rejoiner in the Tories for now.
    Their loss is Yorkshire’s gain, It is great to have you back.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,246
    kle4 said:

    Biden visited NI 'to ensure the Brits didn't screw around' - thanks Uncle Joe
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-65557068

    He's performatively "Irish" in that slightly over the top way that actually Irish people might find a bit gauche, I wouldn't let it get to you.

    I might be more Irish than Biden is.
    If more than half of your ancestors are Irish. The whole of Biden's mother's side is from Ireland.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,653

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    For comparison, the YouGov polling on the coronation was

    A great deal: 11%
    A fair amount: 24%
    Not very much: 31%
    Not at all: 31%

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1654147039054135297
    I care more about Eurovision than I do about the coronation.

    Interesting that countries have and look to leave the monarchy but more nations want to join Eurovision.
    Most Eurovision participant countries are republics :sunglasses:
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,466
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    On topic, I disagree with Mike. That 16% now backing Lab is huge - and runs very counter to a long period where there was almost no net Con-Lab swing (leads being the result more of swings within left-of-centre / right-of-centre blocks, and DKs/WNVs etc).

    It's worth noting that 20% of 2019 LDs and 11% of 2019 Lab voters are also saying DK, so any return-to-base effect will be significantly mitigated by those voters coming home too.

    However, Johnson's 2019 coalition was flaky. While some hard-left activists will have been repelled by Starmer and are now confirmed Green/TUSC/Breakthrough/whatever, their number will be small. By contrast, there were many more first-time Con voters then who will have been put off sufficiently by Boris/Truss/the Tories in general that those really are now lost votes.

    The comparison with 1992-97 is worth making. Labour's vote only went up by 2m between the two elections, while the Tory vote dropped by 4.5m (the LD one fell by 750k, despite more than doubling their MPs). I could well see something similar happening, with many current ex-Con/DKs just sitting it out.

    It’s great to see you posting again. One signal that the Tories are back on track would be you returning to the fold, any thoughts of that?
    No chance. I'm happy in the Yorkshire Party and have no desire to return to the toxic brew that is, and is very likely to remain, the Tory Party over the next 7-10 years, at least.

    Besides, there's no place for a vocal Rejoiner in the Tories for now.
    Their loss is Yorkshire’s gain, It is great to have you back.
    Cheers. And with that, I'm off out to do some gardening!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139
    edited May 2023

    Mr. kle4, Alexander was over a decade younger when he died. And Pitt the Younger only a few years older.

    Be interesting to see if he hangs around, though.

    I think LuckyGuy's head might explode if we compare Rishi to Alexander.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,246

    Jonathan said:

    On topic, I disagree with Mike. That 16% now backing Lab is huge - and runs very counter to a long period where there was almost no net Con-Lab swing (leads being the result more of swings within left-of-centre / right-of-centre blocks, and DKs/WNVs etc).

    It's worth noting that 20% of 2019 LDs and 11% of 2019 Lab voters are also saying DK, so any return-to-base effect will be significantly mitigated by those voters coming home too.

    However, Johnson's 2019 coalition was flaky. While some hard-left activists will have been repelled by Starmer and are now confirmed Green/TUSC/Breakthrough/whatever, their number will be small. By contrast, there were many more first-time Con voters then who will have been put off sufficiently by Boris/Truss/the Tories in general that those really are now lost votes.

    The comparison with 1992-97 is worth making. Labour's vote only went up by 2m between the two elections, while the Tory vote dropped by 4.5m (the LD one fell by 750k, despite more than doubling their MPs). I could well see something similar happening, with many current ex-Con/DKs just sitting it out.

    It’s great to see you posting again. One signal that the Tories are back on track would be you returning to the fold, any thoughts of that?
    Yes, very much welcome back too.

    On topic, I wonder if there isn't a bit of bias to surprise in media coverage, but even among punters looking for a good bet. I think the electorate have made a fairly settled decision that they want a change of government and Starmer seems OK, and it will take something dramatic (which is always possible) to change that.
    I think too that overall the electorate want Labour to have a small majority rather than relying on the SNP. Despite all the imperfections of FPTP I think the system generally delivers the electorate'aggregate desired outcome. So I don't agree with OGH.
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,327
    TimS said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    I haven't noticed it. I never watch anything live bar sport and record everything else do I scroll past all the crap. You can watch a lot more too.
    Mrs J didn't even know it was on!

    I'm really not into Eurovision, and haven't watched it in decades. I'd much rather curl up on the sofa to watch a good box set. But if other people get their kicks from it, fair enough.
    In a Teams meeting with the French yesterday, and one of the Brits mentioned Eurovision. Much gallic shrugging and laughter - "I didn't know it was on"

    Perhaps Eurovision's high camp kitch only appeals to a certain diseased mindset. I will of course be glued to it, getting merrily drunk and hosting the usual 500 post big Facebook chat with friends and acquaintances.
    I’m reporting from the front lines in Burgundy today so I can confirm it’s definitely not as popular here as in the UK, but people do know it’s on.

    The coronation on the other hand: I was just speaking to the estate agent who came to value our house for tax reasons (who has an interesting surname - see below) and he had watched and been very impressed with the coronation. Typically British he said.

    The interesting surname is Buttigieg. I mentioned he shares it with a famous US politician and he said he thinks it’s an Anglo-Maltese name. His family is originally from
    Malta where it’s still fairly common. Do we know if mayor Pete has Maltese connections?

    Pronounced bou-de-shaj in French, not dissimilar to Pete’s boo-de-jej.
    Buttigieg is indeed Maltese by heritage. His name means something to do with chicken...
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,975

    DougSeal said:

    darkage said:

    Snip...

    It does feel utterly absurd to think that a defeat on the scale of 1997 is remotely on the agenda. But the comparable polling numbers are in that ballpark, and "not many voters are actually switching, the don't knows are shy Tories who will back us on the day" was a cope trope of the time.

    After Truss I think it would be absurd for the electorate not to give the Tories a deserved drubbing. People need boundaries and discipline, and if the electorate don't provide those to the Tories then they will simply go further off the rails.

    But, well, we live in absurd times, and Starmer is, perhaps, unbearably tedious.
    The other way of looking at this is that the Truss debacle was very swiftly corrected. Labour subjected us to Corbyn for 4 years.
    The Conservative Party subjected us to Johnson as PM 2019-2022. Truss cost all of us, well the U.K. residents on the board anyway, actual money. Corbyn’s only ill effect on the country as a whole was letting this shower in.
    Corbyn’s only ill effect.!!!
    Wasn’t that more than enough?
    His attitude to the Brexit campaign was worth a few percent the wrong way.

    Though you still get Corbyn fans claiming he was really pro EU
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,484

    On topic, I disagree with Mike. That 16% now backing Lab is huge - and runs very counter to a long period where there was almost no net Con-Lab swing (leads being the result more of swings within left-of-centre / right-of-centre blocks, and DKs/WNVs etc).

    It's worth noting that 20% of 2019 LDs and 11% of 2019 Lab voters are also saying DK, so any return-to-base effect will be significantly mitigated by those voters coming home too.

    However, Johnson's 2019 coalition was flaky. While some hard-left activists will have been repelled by Starmer and are now confirmed Green/TUSC/Breakthrough/whatever, their number will be small. By contrast, there were many more first-time Con voters then who will have been put off sufficiently by Boris/Truss/the Tories in general that those really are now lost votes.

    The comparison with 1992-97 is worth making. Labour's vote only went up by 2m between the two elections, while the Tory vote dropped by 4.5m (the LD one fell by 750k, despite more than doubling their MPs). I could well see something similar happening, with many current ex-Con/DKs just sitting it out.

    I agree with this about the 16% now backing labour and labour seems to be smart enough to not see them as repenting sinners too.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,484

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    All it needs is Harambe.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,959
    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    What have Vanguard done to upset anyone?
  • Options
    LionkingLionking Posts: 12
    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,959
    Lionking said:

    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
    I think......[Microchip from vaccine taking over now] yes Bill Gates is lovely and a pure force for good. [Microchip relinqueshes control back to human]. Now what was I saying?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,653
    edited May 2023
    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    I recognise Gates and Fauci, who are the guy on the far left and the lady and guy sitting on Gates's shoulder?
  • Options
    LionkingLionking Posts: 12

    Foxy said:

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    I could kind of get into Eurovision pre the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia breaking up. Now its just too many countries and too long for a casual watcher to get into it.
    Hence the semifinals etc.

    It's just a bit of fun, on what is otherwise a gairly grey and grim spring.
    In the spirit of Brexit, why not do a British Isles regional one? Manchester and Liverpool deserve their own slot from legacy then London, Ireland, Scotland, Yorkshire, Wales, South West, East and West Midlands and the North East. Home Counties deliberately excluded as don't produce enough good music but can be the judges as they are often quite judgey.
    The home counties produced genesis dont you know.
  • Options
    TresTres Posts: 2,275
    Lionking said:

    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
    FIRST
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,959

    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    I recognise Gates and Faucci, who are the guy on the far left and the lady and guy sitting on Gates's shoulder?
    Richard Gere and Dua Lipa?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,959
    Lionking said:

    Foxy said:

    algarkirk said:

    I’m fairly agnostic about Eurovision (which may encourage public tarring and feathering in the current climate), but is the BBC in danger of frotting itself into a seizure over the event? It’s fcuking relentless.

    Yes. R4 Today is going on about it relentlessly, and has done for some time. I wonder what proportion of the R4 audience (average age 103) follow this sub ironic eurotrash?

    77% care not very much or at all
    19% care a great deal or a fair amount

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1656670495574745095?t=gFlheFuFbj-EzboXeQdfsQ&s=19
    I could kind of get into Eurovision pre the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia breaking up. Now its just too many countries and too long for a casual watcher to get into it.
    Hence the semifinals etc.

    It's just a bit of fun, on what is otherwise a gairly grey and grim spring.
    In the spirit of Brexit, why not do a British Isles regional one? Manchester and Liverpool deserve their own slot from legacy then London, Ireland, Scotland, Yorkshire, Wales, South West, East and West Midlands and the North East. Home Counties deliberately excluded as don't produce enough good music but can be the judges as they are often quite judgey.
    The home counties produced genesis dont you know.
    Exactly!
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,036
    Lionking said:

    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
    You are quite right, he did release Windows Me.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,694

    I should have added, there's a chart I find interesting in the tweet below that plots local NEV share against the contemporary GE VI polling. Last week's election results implied polling of almost exactly where it in fact was (it's maybe ticked up a couple of points since).

    In other words, that ~15% Lab lead is real and rooted in hard votes.

    Now, as we've been told many times, polls are a snapshot not a prediction. Just because Labour is mid-teens up now it doesn't mean they will be come the election (indeed, it doesn't even mean they would be mid-teens up if there was a GE tomorrow; polls have been known to be wrong). A lot can happen in 12-18 months. But that's a different point - whether or not Labour will retain the landslide-delivering lead they have now isn't the issue. The issue is whether they currently have one. And they do.

    https://twitter.com/Beyond_Topline/status/1654174876754640903

    The “A lot can happen in 12-18 months” could also swing both ways. A correction of the stock market - inflated from decade of printing magick money - house price crash - higher debt repayments, perhaps all this from a ratings downgrade, could trigger off more problems for banks and pensions too - these things could rip more credibility from the government, sending ratings lower.

    political scandals and mishaps, such as skeletons coming out the woodwork, or misjudgments like the Patterson Affair - a lot of blue on blue factional infighting, all these things could cost the Tories even more votes.

    Not delivering on promises could send them lower, inflation, growth in particular - where Mike in header and many others suspect big slice of the currently large Reform vote backs Tories at next election, getting nowhere delivering on migrant crossings especially in summer 2024 ahead of autumn election, and maybe it won’t be such a big slice. Perhaps we should view those 2019 Tories who say Reform are similar to those d/k, but actually even one step further along the road from the reach of Tories in 2024, maybe not vote reform, but if no reform candidate just more likely to sit it out.

    We can’t just presume 2015 swingback will happen next 18 months.
  • Options
    LionkingLionking Posts: 12
    Interesting watching Trumps performance this week and the favourable response he got. This is Anderson Cooper speaking at the end of it. He sounded close to tears.

    https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1656927593067577344?s=20

  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,175
    RobD said:

    Lionking said:

    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
    You are quite right, he did release Windows Me.
    Windows Vista, Windows 8, Windows 11…
  • Options
    JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,215
    edited May 2023
    I fear Lionking will soon be @RCS100's trophy.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,789
    Lionking said:

    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
    Yes. I hear he pays for free flying lessons to help train pilots, particularly BA pilots.
  • Options
    LionkingLionking Posts: 12

    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    I recognise Gates and Fauci, who are the guy on the far left and the lady and guy sitting on Gates's shoulder?
    One of them is Jeffrey Epstein one of Gates "buddies".
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,175
    Ukraine having another good day in Bakhmut. LOL at the Russians trying to sell a withdrawal from large parts of the town as a positive move.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,745

    Lionking said:

    kle4 said:

    Some of the memes pushed on this illustration might even pierce Corbyn's naivety.


    Such subtlety on display, such nuance, I am baffled.
    Hmm so you think bill gates is a force for pure good in the world do you.
    I think......[Microchip from vaccine taking over now] yes Bill Gates is lovely and a pure force for good. [Microchip relinqueshes control back to human]. Now what was I saying?
    It's Saturday, so let's start the countdown clock?
  • Options
    LionkingLionking Posts: 12
    Sandpit said:

    Ukraine having another good day in Bakhmut. LOL at the Russians trying to sell a withdrawal from large parts of the town as a positive move.

    Trump was asked 3 times this week in the debate if he wanted a ukraine victory. He didnt answer and merely said he wanted the fighting to stop. Clearly i think we can conclude Trump favours a peace deal on Russias terms.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,694
    So, if it is going to be Starmer winning a hundred seats, which big names are we losing? No chance of Steve Baker running for the leadership then, unfortunately. How safe is Badenoch, Braverman, Penny, Tughanat, Barclays (euphemism for ******* btw)
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,745
    JohnO said:

    I fear Lionking will soon be @RCS100's trophy.

    In the circle of life
    It's the wheel of fortune
    It's the leap of faith
    It's the band of hope
    Till we find our place
    On the path unwinding
    In the circle, the circle of life
This discussion has been closed.