SNPeaked? How far could they fall in 2024? – politicalbetting.com
SNPeaked? How far could they fall in 2024? – politicalbetting.com
Recent revelations about SNP bookkeeping and motorhome buying have led to headlines about a sudden meltdown, but this is somewhat misleading. While their polling remained stable until late 2022 their position has looked increasingly precarious.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
You have a good bet there.
Re last thread Sunak's live press conference just now from Hiroshima ducks questions on Braverman
When he returns to London time for him to take action on the terrible Braverman who is doing him no favours
On topic
I think the SNP and in particular independence are in great peril and anything could happen
A source close to the home secretary said: "Mrs Braverman accepted three points for a speeding offence which took place last summer.
"The Cabinet Office was made aware of the situation as requested by Mrs Braverman. She was not and is not disqualified from driving."
A Cabinet Office spokesman said: "It would not be appropriate to comment on the existence or content of advice between Government departments."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65659053
The version being reported elsewhere is that the civil servants were concerned at her request and reported it to the Cabinet Office. If anything, the "source close to" Braverman suggests it was she who tried to get the Cabinet Office to intervene.
Either way, it was clearly more than Braverman simply asking the civil servants for information about the options.
A significant difference is that support for independence is quite strong with younger voters; the demographic outlook for the Conservative Party is considerably shakier.
Striking how Putin is adopting Trump's perceived enemies as his own. The new Russian sanctions list includes people Trump considers adversaries like Letitia James, Brad Raffensperger and the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt even though none has anything to do with Russia policy.
https://twitter.com/peterbakernyt/status/1660097645657075712
To be honest I don't see there's all that much in this Braverman thing. She got done, as most of us do from time to time, and was embarrassed at the thought of appearing alongside the great unwashed at one of those courses with which I personally am very familiar. She tried to see if she could wriggle out of it, it didn't work: she tried to use a bit of 'fluence and that didn't work either, so she took the points and paid the fine.
It's no big deal but I think she missed a trick. If she had gone on the course she could have made a virtue of it, telling everyone what a good thing they are (which is true) and how it's helped make her a better driver, better understanding of the issues, blah blah blah. It would have been good publicity, and helped her popularity with that important voter - the oppressed motorist.
Instead she's managed to make herself look a bit sneaky, again. It's not a resigning issue, in my opinion, but it ain't a great look either. Whatever Labour may say publicly, privately they will be anxious that she remains in Office. She's a great asset to them.
On the SNP, agree absolutely. The ony question is how low do the SNP go. My guess is 20 seats. Any other offers?
The details, for now not entirely clear, will matter.
Senior Tories say Trump-style takeover could precipitate party meltdown
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/21/senior-tories-say-trump-style-takeover-could-precipitate-party-meltdown
enior Tories are warning their party will be finished should it undergo “a Trumpian style takeover” from the right, amid growing concerns that it risks political meltdown in its “blue wall” heartlands.
Prominent Conservatives from across the party are now increasingly concerned that a tilt to the right and anger over the handling of Brexit could lead to the party’s support collapsing in liberal, home counties seats in the same way that Labour imploded in Scotland in 2015.
A backlash is growing among liberal Tories after a week in which figures on the right of the party championed Boris Johnson and accused Rishi Sunak of backtracking on Brexit, while the home secretary, Suella Braverman, openly denounced “experts and elites”...
OTOH, one of those quoted is Hancock.
Which makes me wonder if this did come from Team Rishi. If a PM wanted to destroy a minister, a better timeline would surely be
1. Get the story in the papers.
2. Furious meeting with minister that night.
3. Sacked in time for the Sunday morning talk shows.
The "take advice, due process" thing is hot air. The only thing that matters is whether the PM wants that minister in office or not.
It looks a lot like she's made all sorts of special requests, in a fairly obviously arrogant and entitled way.
...New analysis has increased fears of a blue wall crisis. The 2023 local election Tory vote share in more Remain wards was far below what the party achieved under David Cameron, according to research by Robert Ford, professor of political science at the University of Manchester. Conservative votes in 2023 were down almost 14 points on their performance in 2015 in the most Remain wards.
It is causing panic among some Tories. “I’m more worried about the blue wall than anything,” said one former cabinet minister. “I really think there’s a chance that what happened to Labour in Scotland in 2015 could happen to us in the blue wall at the next election...
...Ford said that while caution should be taken before applying local election findings to a general election, there was a significant threat to the Conservatives in blue wall seats. “There have been large swings against the Conservatives in many quintessentially home counties seats – for example the party’s vote fell in most of the seats in Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Cambridgeshire, Oxfordshire and Surrey,” he said.
“If what I’ve noticed in the local election results translates into a general election, it is a real problem. You see the same kind of proportional swing dynamics in 2023 that we saw hitting the Liberal Democrats in 2015, or hitting Scottish Labour in 2015 – or going further back, hitting the Conservatives in 1997. That is a really dangerous scenario where the stronger you start, the further you fall. When that happens, no one is safe.”
“Better to have your enemies inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in.”
― Lyndon B. Johnson
See also Kemi Badenoch. We hear a lot more about her working at McDonald's than her being the daughter of a US academic.
Senior Tories are warning their party will be finished should it undergo “a Trumpian style takeover” from the right, amid growing concerns that it risks political meltdown in its “blue wall” heartlands.
Prominent Conservatives from across the party are now increasingly concerned that a tilt to the right and anger over the handling of Brexit could lead to the party’s support collapsing in liberal, home counties seats in the same way that Labour imploded in Scotland in 2015.
Lord Heseltine, the former deputy prime minister, said his party was now heading to lose the next election and would require a complete rebuild in the wake of defeat. “At the moment the party is tearing itself apart,” he said. “It was Rab Butler who rebuilt the party after the 1945 defeat, with a completely new party, policy and philosophy. The party knew it had to win power. The same thing is going to happen after this next election.”
Vaizey warns that a lurch to the right could allow Labour to dominate for years. “We have been here before,” he writes. “After our defeat in 1997, so many Conservatives blamed the outcome on our party not being Conservative enough. It was a long and hard struggle to get the party back to the mainstream, and to re-learn the lesson that you only win in politics by looking forward, not back. “You actually have to like the country in which you live, and want to make it better, in order for the public to want to back you. Harking back to a golden age, with a wish-list of policies that are completely absurd in a modern, developed nation, is for the birds.”
It's becoming as vague and unhelpful as terms like 'progressive' which is just an almost adult way of saying 'goodies'.
LBJ dominated his administration in a way no Tory leader, especially Sunak, could even dream of.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65662563
"Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky appears to have confirmed that Russia has won the long-running and bloody battle for the city of Bakhmut.
Asked on Sunday whether Ukraine had control of the eastern Ukrainian city, Zelensky said: "I think not." "
An area can be contested. Just because it's not under the control of Ukraine, or Russia, doesn't mean the other side necessarily has control of it.
I think Ukraine could really do with some good news soon.
I get why it happens. Not all the grief Sunak gets for being rich is fair, though it clearly does create empathy issues. But that doesn't neutralise the discord.
But if we look at the Conservative leadership teams since about 2019, there are a lot of them who started very near the top of the tree and have put a lot of passion into getting to the very top.
Arguably this is just part of reheated Thatcherism, but critically with the economic and work ethic part of Thatcherism written out. Compared to Thatcherism , National Conservatism is dumb, economically illiterate and lazy.
It obviously isn't great news for Ukraine but I'm reminded of the Mexican colonel who while Santa Ana was celebrating finally capturing the Alamo commented, 'one more glorious victory like this and we're finished.'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/468183.stm
As to dismissing Braverman, surely after the locals, the last thing Sunak needs to do is poke the vipers' nest that is the National Conservatism wing of his broad church.
Best to suggest, "nothing to see, move along".
The timeline almost makes more sense as Suella hoping for suicide by PM. She has to go, but in a way that makes Rishi look bad on the way out.
If you were always to wait until the outcome is clear, then you wouldn’t get many worthwhile bets.
That said, while the odds Pip obtained might be interesting, 3/1 isn’t generous enough.
The basic message is that for a large number of voters what matters is independence. They’ll vote for the parties that seek it, whatever they do and whoever leads them.
For that reason I’d expect the SNP to never drop below 30% of the vote in Scotland and probably be closer to 40% most of the time. A Tory government in Westminster and a charismatic, capable leader could get the number up towards 50%.
All that’s a long way of saying that the SNP is going to have more Scottish MPs and MSPs than any other party for a very long time to come.
What could change that? A formal split between constitutionalists and secessionists. That might let Labour through the middle. But it won’t happen because of FPTP.
Firstly, the bulk of the SNP seats are of course in the central belt, where the vast majority of the population are. A strong Tory party had almost no impact there. Their strength was in the borders and the north east and piling up more votes there won very few seats. Angus changed hands a couple of times, the Perthshire seat looked vulnerable but Wishart held on and one or two seats in the NE switched. A Labour recovery, in contrast puts 30+ seats in play.
Secondly, as the leading party it has been a strength of the SNP that their vote has been fairly even in the central belt. They haven't particularly had the areas of exceptional strength. That made their vote extremely efficient but it also creates a tipping point where a large number of seats become vulnerable together. We saw this in reverse for Labour in the wipe out of 2015.
Thirdly, a major selling point of the SNP, like Labour before them, is to keep the Tories out. If Labour looks on track for a majority this is simply not available to the SNP, indeed it will be argued that voting more Labour MPs is a much more effective way of achieving that objective. I think a lot of Scots will want to vote for the party that is going to replace the Tories, not be a part of a noisy but pointless opposition to them.
Fourthly, for the last decade or so none of this has mattered because the campaign for a second referendum was so strong but the SNP are running out of options here and it is far from clear what their conference next month is going to produce an answer. If independence is on the back burner for a while the focus will inevitably turn to what is happening in the UK.
As a Unionist I am pretty happy about all of this. A SNP without access to such a large amount of Westminster largesse and public funding will be weaker and more vulnerable. As a broadly Tory supporter (despite reservations, not least about Braverman) it is less unalloyed good news but, frankly, too bad.
I slightly hope she stays. Associating her odious behaviour with a motoring offence is to trivialise the damage she has done
I'm reminded of Sergeant Berrigan's acid commentary on Lord Robin Holloway: 'You made him look like a bloody idiot, sir, but that ain't difficult because he is a bloody idiot.'
This bottle scheme business is in the news today and seems odd - apparently they urgently need exemption to a UK Act in order to do it, but only requested this in March of this year. Obviously opportunity is being taken by the government to make them sweat about it, but is there a good procedural reason the request was so late in the day? Perhaps they could not request until everything was ready to go?
Do Putin's people just watch Fox News 24/7 and pick out people hosts whine about? I mean, the Sectetary of State of Georgia only notable internationally because he refused to just give Trump the election? Curious choice.
Is that official?
They are gifting it to Labour an dthe sooner the better to be rid of this bunch of out of touch rogues..
It must have hurt Sir Humphrey to be described as shifty and weak. It must have hurt more to be so described by someone as shifty and weak as Jim Hacker. What would have hurt most was the knowledge that Hacker was right.
The (very) silly feature of the Braverman debacle is that had she attended a speeding course it would have demonstrated a commitment to equality before the law, and a break with Boris-ism.
Now it just seems as though she (especially) believes she shouldn’t be treated the same as “ordinary” folk.
So unless more emerges she's safe. Especially since she's been lining herself up as a grievance alternative leader candidate.
And each time it's only made him weaker with colleagues without making him more popular with the public, so from his perspective there's little benefit to being hardline on ethics unless someone's position is truly untenable.
But somewhat to my surprise there have been proposals for a pure g. t. without such a limit. Justine Greening, for one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graduate_tax
It must have been painful for the Foreign Office to be called weak, indecisive and stupid. It must have been more painful to be called that by somebody as weak, indecisive and stupid as Hacker. What would have made it most painful was that Hacker was correct.
From A Diplomatic Incident.
*I realise this is the most unconvincing lie since Dominic Cummings claimed he drove to Durham for childcare reasons.
Like Momentum and others before them the key thing seems to be that the true enemy is internal - those not fighting external opponents in the right way or hard enough.
It seems like something you do in opposition whilst battling out for what direction a new leader should go.
It could well be Labour gains from the SNP are enough to give Starmer a small majority UK wide after Labour gains from the Conservatives lose the Tories their majority
And if says she was ousted because Sunak wouldn't let her be tougher on migration see her popularity there explode further.
Second Tyneside team to reach a cup final this season.
Nicola Sturgeon is completely lacking in self-awareness when she complains of polarised debate
https://www.holyrood.com/editors-column/view,nicola-sturgeon-is-completely-lacking-in-selfawareness-when-she-complains-of-polarised-debate
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/20/army-hired-bearskin-caps-spare-fancy-dress-film-studios/ (£££)
Tory defence cuts?
The advantage of the former is that it won't load students with debt but, absent Herculean political will, would result in more restricted access to University (something I believe is neither in the interests of students nor in the interests of the country).
The latter route would see fees rise, and in some cases pretty astronomically. I'm not in favour of removing the cap on fees entirely, but to a point where Universities would actually start to differentiate themselves on fees. This would allow Universities some breathing space and give them a lever to raise some income. The rate and periods of repayment, interest etc would all need to be optimised based political objectives (no write-off, for example?) but it would be likely that a substantial number of loans will never fully be repaid, leaving the tax payer on the hook for some of the book. In that case the loan acts as a kind of subsidy, which I think is as fair as possible. Under this system, Universities will be given a mechanism for increasing their own funding and, for students, University will remain 'free at the point of use.' The problem then is selling the whole thing to debt-averse students, who might come from poorer backgrounds, that it's worth it. But that's a job for Universities.
Then I read all that I've written and wonder what happened to me, man. Marketisation of Universities? Fuck me!
You cannot kill animals for their furs and skins.
*Of course it isn't clear if she broke the ministerial code because civil servants may have refused to let her.
It would also disadvantage U.K. based companies by making staff (in effect) more expensive - they would have to pay them more to take home the same. So the incentive would be to employee people overseas.
I would add that the major employee subject to such wage pressures would be of course, the government.
1. According to William Wragg, when Braverman was attending an induction session led by the expenses people (IPSA), she asked if, hypothetically, an MP who was caught speeding while carrying out their duties could claim the fine back on expenses. (Wragg is standing by his story).
2. Last night's story.
Although 1. is old news, it seems to me even more damning than 2. How stupid is she?