People should understand that this, any government has no interest in stopping the boats, reducing immigration, or anything which restricts entry to this country in a meaningful way for many people.
I mean what was that definition of insanity again?
Since the 10s of thousands of pledges, the Labour "controls on immigration" mugs, Rwanda, mouseless detention centres, and what have you.
Unfortunately, from 188-1 at Lord's and arguably also in the second innings at Edgbaston, England's batting has been poor. They simply have not shown enough application. They've made fantastic opportunities and let them slip with dumb shots. Coupled with some very ordinary fielding they have literally thrown away the Ashes. First defeat on home soil since 2001.
Probably but Stokes can get a 1st innings lead at this rate
Sighs.
Why do you lot never learn?
(And I think we needed a *large* first innings lead if we were to be competitive as tomorrow looks a bad day for batting and pitch maintenance.)
On the wider issue of kicking children in the teeth and stamping on their necks:
"Libraries in England generate at least £3.4bn in value a year through services supporting children’s literacy, digital inclusion and health, a study has found.
Researchers at the University of East Anglia discovered that the services that a typical branch provides in a year are worth £1m, and that libraries’ value could equate to six times their running costs."
We should have ten times as many libraries then. This kind of analysis is always so speculative. in this case they include rates and social care that would otherwise have been delivered anyway.
I look at the polls and I see a country that is fucking traumatised and desperate.
Only the most complacent of pensioners - that stubborn rump of owner-occupiers who don’t perceive anything outside the darkened windows of the Daily Mail - still profess to supporting the Tories.
We're in the match because our bowlers are better than their bowlers at batting, and quite honestly if you include Stokes better than our own batsmen at batting too.
With RefUK on 9% and tied with the LDs for 3rd in today's Yougov, Jenrick's comments may not show much compassion but will be firmly focused on the hard line on illegal immigration Sunak needs to win back 2019 Conservatives voters now voting Reform
If the Tories get all of those 9% saying RefUK to vote Conservative, ceteris paribus, they still massively lose, 47% to 31%, so by 16%, a bigger margin than the 1997 loss.
I look at the polls and I see a country that is fucking traumatised and desperate.
Only the most complacent of pensioners - that stubborn rump of owner-occupiers who don’t perceive anything outside the darkened windows of the Daily Mail - still profess to supporting the Tories.
25% for the Tories there though is higher than the 22% with Yougov
I have to admire that response!
Nothing to admire there, comparing apples with pears became Psephologicaly embarrassing before I was even born! YouGov fruit has ref and green on 9 at expense of larger parties. Overall picture is this slide for the Tories is becoming alarming now.
To be analytical, there was a commentary in “I” newspaper this week that Sunak has reshuffle problem because his cabinet is unpopular. I think he hasn’t even been in hot seat a year, much of this is electorate summing him up. I think Sunak is the Tory problem, immaturely over promising and under delivering really turning voters off.
What made people think Sunak was a wunderkind? His financial decision making in this parliament has been dire.
I look at the polls and I see a country that is fucking traumatised and desperate.
But that’s the USA.
Meanwhile, here in the U.K. we’re at the fag end of a tired incompetent government which chances are won’t be in power a year from now. The likely alternative may not be sparkly and exciting, but we’ll settle for competent and dull.
Talking of trains I’m on the 14.03 to Penzance, getting off at Totnes. A definite holiday vibe among the passengers. Beautiful weather today (which should have been good for batting, alas).
Mm, you'll get the Dawlish coast and Teign Estuary. Is it the direct line? It's a nice trundle past the Crofton pumping station and along the Kennet and Avon Canal.
Yes, the direct line, and always the great Dawlish warren run.
We're in the match because our bowlers are better than their bowlers at batting, and quite honestly if you include Stokes better than our own batsmen at batting too.
Aus top 5 99-5 Mitch Marsh 118 Bottom 5 23-5
Eng top 5 69-5 Stokes 80 Bottom 5 67-5
That's not quite right, as both Marsh and Stokes were out - so 118/1 and 80/1.
We're in the match because our bowlers are better than their bowlers at batting, and quite honestly if you include Stokes better than our own batsmen at batting too.
Aus top 5 99-5 Mitch Marsh 118 Bottom 5 23-5
Eng top 5 69-5 Stokes 80 Bottom 5 67-5
That's not quite right, as both Marsh and Stokes were out - so 118/1 and 80/1.
Indeed, you could suggest our Bottom 5 at 67-4 could have done better than our top 5 at 69-5
I look at the polls and I see a country that is fucking traumatised and desperate.
Only the most complacent of pensioners - that stubborn rump of owner-occupiers who don’t perceive anything outside the darkened windows of the Daily Mail - still profess to supporting the Tories.
I expect I will still vote Tory, not because I think they've been good but because I expect the other lot to make it worse. I'd love to have an alternative government which I could see running things better, but I just don't see one. Labour's instinct always appears to be to regulate more, spend more, borrow more, hector more and export less. Not that the Tories have covered themselves in any sort of glory in any of this, it should be stressed. Credit to Labour for exploring ways of building more houses, mind you. That sort-of policy announcement, at least, I thought was worthy of consideration. The fact that it wasn't exactly what I would do doesn't alter the fact that it is possibly better than what we have now.
We're in the match because our bowlers are better than their bowlers at batting, and quite honestly if you include Stokes better than our own batsmen at batting too.
Aus top 5 99-5 Mitch Marsh 118 Bottom 5 23-5
Eng top 5 69-5 Stokes 80 Bottom 5 67-5
That's not quite right, as both Marsh and Stokes were out - so 118/1 and 80/1.
Your right. That means our bowlers were definitely better than our batsmen averaging 16.75 against 13.8 for the batsmen.
25% for the Tories there though is higher than the 22% with Yougov
When the world ends I want you there to give a positive spin for the Tories. “YouGov’s last survey before Selby became an irradiated wasteland put the Tories 2% ahead amongst cockroaches and other species most likely to survive a nuclear inferno.”
The cockroaches though had a higher approval rating...
And a more humane position on unescorted child refugees.
We're in the match because our bowlers are better than their bowlers at batting, and quite honestly if you include Stokes better than our own batsmen at batting too.
Aus top 5 99-5 Mitch Marsh 118 Bottom 5 23-5
Eng top 5 69-5 Stokes 80 Bottom 5 67-5
That's not quite right, as both Marsh and Stokes were out - so 118/1 and 80/1.
Your right. That means our bowlers were definitely better than our batsmen averaging 16.75 against 13.8 for the batsmen.
13.8 ! Shocking.
With both Robinson and Stokes seeming to be injured and unlikely to bowl much, I wonder if Root will end up having to bowl a fair bit and end up doing more with the ball than he did with the bat?
With RefUK on 9% and tied with the LDs for 3rd in today's Yougov, Jenrick's comments may not show much compassion but will be firmly focused on the hard line on illegal immigration Sunak needs to win back 2019 Conservatives voters now voting Reform
If the Tories get all of those 9% saying RefUK to vote Conservative, ceteris paribus, they still massively lose, 47% to 31%, so by 16%, a bigger margin than the 1997 loss.
However don't forget Blair's New Labour was polling at 60%+ in a few polls pre 1997, levels Starmer Labour has never reached and ended up with only 43% on polling day 1997
I look at the polls and I see a country that is fucking traumatised and desperate.
Only the most complacent of pensioners - that stubborn rump of owner-occupiers who don’t perceive anything outside the darkened windows of the Daily Mail - still profess to supporting the Tories.
With RefUK on 9% and tied with the LDs for 3rd in today's Yougov, Jenrick's comments may not show much compassion but will be firmly focused on the hard line on illegal immigration Sunak needs to win back 2019 Conservatives voters now voting Reform
If the Tories get all of those 9% saying RefUK to vote Conservative, ceteris paribus, they still massively lose, 47% to 31%, so by 16%, a bigger margin than the 1997 loss.
However don't forget Blair's New Labour was polling at 60%+ in a few polls pre 1997, levels Starmer Labour has never reached and ended up with only 43% on polling day 1997
Was that because Major went after the Referendum Party vote?
Just put my entire fortune* on Australia to win this at the astonishingly generous odds of 1.73. Stokes can barely walk, Robinson can barely move, Wood can only bowl in spells of five overs at a time, Moeen is expensive. Hard to see how we're going to take 10 wickets from here. Come on Joe Root's competent spin!
Just put my entire fortune* on Australia to win this at the astonishingly generous odds of 1.73. Stokes can barely walk, Robinson can barely move, Wood can only bowl in spells of five overs at a time, Moeen is expensive. Hard to see how we're going to take 10 wickets from here. Come on Joe Root's competent spin!
With RefUK on 9% and tied with the LDs for 3rd in today's Yougov, Jenrick's comments may not show much compassion but will be firmly focused on the hard line on illegal immigration Sunak needs to win back 2019 Conservatives voters now voting Reform
If the Tories get all of those 9% saying RefUK to vote Conservative, ceteris paribus, they still massively lose, 47% to 31%, so by 16%, a bigger margin than the 1997 loss.
However don't forget Blair's New Labour was polling at 60%+ in a few polls pre 1997, levels Starmer Labour has never reached and ended up with only 43% on polling day 1997
Was that because Major went after the Referendum Party vote?
No because most of the Conservative core vote returned.
The Referendum Party and UKIP still got almost a million votes combined in 1997 however and cost the Tories several seats
25% for the Tories there though is higher than the 22% with Yougov
I have to admire that response!
Nothing to admire there, comparing apples with pears became Psephologicaly embarrassing before I was even born! YouGov fruit has ref and green on 9 at expense of larger parties. Overall picture is this slide for the Tories is becoming alarming now.
To be analytical, there was a commentary in “I” newspaper this week that Sunak has reshuffle problem because his cabinet is unpopular. I think he hasn’t even been in hot seat a year, much of this is electorate summing him up. I think Sunak is the Tory problem, immaturely over promising and under delivering really turning voters off.
What made people think Sunak was a wunderkind? His financial decision making in this parliament has been dire.
Whilst he's been found out at the top level by being promoted too quickly, a lot of it isn't his fault, really. You could reanimate a fusion of Thatcher, Churchill and Disraeli and they would struggle to lead the Conservative government right now.
The fallout of N years of poor decisions (where N is somewhere between 1 and 78, possibly more, depending on your political taste) is managing to land on Sunak all at once. Some of it is down to policies and people he has supported, but quite a lot isn't.
Just put my entire fortune* on Australia to win this at the astonishingly generous odds of 1.73. Stokes can barely walk, Robinson can barely move, Wood can only bowl in spells of five overs at a time, Moeen is expensive. Hard to see how we're going to take 10 wickets from here. Come on Joe Root's competent spin!
*£44.30. The whole of my skybet account.
I'm giving you credit for Warner, then.
(Broad should bring a carrot to hand to him next time.)
If the Right (in one sense anyway) Honorable (???) wishes to foster a LESS welcoming environment for pint-sized asylum-seekrs, then he ought to order that his official portrait be plastered prominently and frequently in all juvenile alien detention centres?
Terrified tots would be screaming for immediate deportation . . . on next flight to Orlando . . .
Giving Gov. Ron DeSantis yet another stick to beat up . . . his own so-called presidential campaign . . .
With RefUK on 9% and tied with the LDs for 3rd in today's Yougov, Jenrick's comments may not show much compassion but will be firmly focused on the hard line on illegal immigration Sunak needs to win back 2019 Conservatives voters now voting Reform
If the Tories get all of those 9% saying RefUK to vote Conservative, ceteris paribus, they still massively lose, 47% to 31%, so by 16%, a bigger margin than the 1997 loss.
However don't forget Blair's New Labour was polling at 60%+ in a few polls pre 1997, levels Starmer Labour has never reached and ended up with only 43% on polling day 1997
But Blair was a once in a century political genius in the right place at the right time, while Starmer is an overpromoted medocrity in the right place at the right time (so far).
Somebody should run a poll in which they include a fake choice just for a laugh.
They do do this occasionally! It's not for a laugh, it's a way of checking. From memory a fictional individual or party will get about 2-4% in a poll.
I've just tried googling for this phenom but cannot find it[1]. Can some kind person remind me?
[1] Google does not work for me as well as it did, and the deterioration is noticable
Good afternoon Peck Thank you for your query of 07Jul2023 in which you mentioned pollsters using fake choices. You may be interested that there is a long history of pollsters using fictional candidates/bills/acts to assess their polls. Please see below for details.
Fictitious names used by opinion pollsters to check their polls * Stewart Lewis * Stuart Lewis
Fictitious bills/acts used by opinion pollsters to check their polls * ‘Monetary Control Bill/Act" * ‘Agricultural Trade Bill/Act" * "Metallic Metals Bill/Act" * "Public Affairs Bill/Act"
With RefUK on 9% and tied with the LDs for 3rd in today's Yougov, Jenrick's comments may not show much compassion but will be firmly focused on the hard line on illegal immigration Sunak needs to win back 2019 Conservatives voters now voting Reform
If the Tories get all of those 9% saying RefUK to vote Conservative, ceteris paribus, they still massively lose, 47% to 31%, so by 16%, a bigger margin than the 1997 loss.
However don't forget Blair's New Labour was polling at 60%+ in a few polls pre 1997, levels Starmer Labour has never reached and ended up with only 43% on polling day 1997
Was that because Major went after the Referendum Party vote?
No because most of the Conservative core vote returned.
The Referendum Party and UKIP still got almost a million votes combined in 1997 however and cost the Tories several seats
So you’re saying that, after Sunak goes after the Reform UK vote, the Tories will lose on a similar scale to 1997, but it will be even worse if they don’t go after the Reform UK vote?
With RefUK on 9% and tied with the LDs for 3rd in today's Yougov, Jenrick's comments may not show much compassion but will be firmly focused on the hard line on illegal immigration Sunak needs to win back 2019 Conservatives voters now voting Reform
If the Tories get all of those 9% saying RefUK to vote Conservative, ceteris paribus, they still massively lose, 47% to 31%, so by 16%, a bigger margin than the 1997 loss.
However don't forget Blair's New Labour was polling at 60%+ in a few polls pre 1997, levels Starmer Labour has never reached and ended up with only 43% on polling day 1997
But Blair was a once in a century political genius in the right place at the right time, while Starmer is an overpromoted medocrity in the right place at the right time (so far).
Starmer may be an overpromoted mediocrity, but he's facing an even more overpromoted mediocrity rather than John Major.
Only Rohit Sharma, with 70 in only 50 tests, hit at anything like the same rate.
(And Pant, of course - 55 in 33 - and Afridi, 52 in 27.)
In terms of sixes per balls faced Southee must be top. Afridi top per match.
What's remarkable considering how many 6s Stokes has, is just how low his Strike Rate is versus many others on that list.
Stokes is great because he's a clever player. He can play 'Bazball', but he's equally confident to bat slowly and defend his wicket.
Pretty sure he has the biggest gap in scoring tempo of any modern batsman by a distance. Struggling to even think of contenders from that list, they are either blast it merchants or just top level all round but steady tempo batters.
Angelo Matthews maybe closest, but less explosive and less often.
This is a nice little article which takes a skeptical look at New Labour’s constitutional reform, and potential changes proposed by Gordon Brown - from a left wing perspective.
“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.” - Hubert Humphrey
Seems that current Conservative HMG and Party is (at best) 0.5 of 3 by this scorecard.
Seeing as how the only ones mentioned that today's "true" Tories give a hoot about, are mortgage -holding elders?
Just put my entire fortune* on Australia to win this at the astonishingly generous odds of 1.73. Stokes can barely walk, Robinson can barely move, Wood can only bowl in spells of five overs at a time, Moeen is expensive. Hard to see how we're going to take 10 wickets from here. Come on Joe Root's competent spin!
*£44.30. The whole of my skybet account.
I'm giving you credit for Warner, then.
(Broad should bring a carrot to hand to him next time.)
“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.” - Hubert Humphrey
Seems that current Conservative HMG and Party is (at best) 0.5 of 3 by this scorecard.
Seeing as how the only ones mentioned that today's "true" Tories give a hoot about, are mortgage -holding elders?
I don't think Truss and Kwarteng did much for mortgage holders.
Minimum wage, state pension and benefits all up 10% however
25% for the Tories there though is higher than the 22% with Yougov
When the world ends I want you there to give a positive spin for the Tories. “YouGov’s last survey before Selby became an irradiated wasteland put the Tories 2% ahead amongst cockroaches and other species most likely to survive a nuclear inferno.”
The cockroaches though had a higher approval rating...
And a more humane position on unescorted child refugees.
“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.” - Hubert Humphrey
Seems that current Conservative HMG and Party is (at best) 0.5 of 3 by this scorecard.
Seeing as how the only ones mentioned that today's "true" Tories give a hoot about, are mortgage -holding elders?
I don't think Truss and Kwarteng did much for mortgage holders.
Minimum wage, state pension and benefits all up 10% however
Today's Tory party is a party for those on welfare, just the welfare is the pension.
Work for a living, and today's Tories don't care about you.
With RefUK on 9% and tied with the LDs for 3rd in today's Yougov, Jenrick's comments may not show much compassion but will be firmly focused on the hard line on illegal immigration Sunak needs to win back 2019 Conservatives voters now voting Reform
If the Tories get all of those 9% saying RefUK to vote Conservative, ceteris paribus, they still massively lose, 47% to 31%, so by 16%, a bigger margin than the 1997 loss.
However don't forget Blair's New Labour was polling at 60%+ in a few polls pre 1997, levels Starmer Labour has never reached and ended up with only 43% on polling day 1997
Those polls (very high Labour figures, big swingback) were done without trying to account for Shy Tories. The only firm doing that properly at the time (Gold Standard ICM) got systematically lower figures mid term (their highest was 53%) and much less swingback.
Now everyone does some variant of that correction. Labour's peak at the height of the Trusstershambles was 57% and they've just had a poll rating of 51% from Omnisis.
The future is not ours to see in advance, but right now the Conservatives are doing about as badly, and Labour about as well as in the mid 90s, if we don't compare apples with bananas.
And the worst of it for the Conservatives? They aren't losing badly to a genius of retail politics, they're losing badly to a boring old lefty lawyer.
“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.” - Hubert Humphrey
Seems that current Conservative HMG and Party is (at best) 0.5 of 3 by this scorecard.
Seeing as how the only ones mentioned that today's "true" Tories give a hoot about, are mortgage -holding elders?
I don't think Truss and Kwarteng did much for mortgage holders.
Minimum wage, state pension and benefits all up 10% however
But not in real terms. In fact, rather less, as the past year's massive rise won't have been compensated for properly.
25% for the Tories there though is higher than the 22% with Yougov
I have to admire that response!
Nothing to admire there, comparing apples with pears became Psephologicaly embarrassing before I was even born! YouGov fruit has ref and green on 9 at expense of larger parties. Overall picture is this slide for the Tories is becoming alarming now.
To be analytical, there was a commentary in “I” newspaper this week that Sunak has reshuffle problem because his cabinet is unpopular. I think he hasn’t even been in hot seat a year, much of this is electorate summing him up. I think Sunak is the Tory problem, immaturely over promising and under delivering really turning voters off.
What made people think Sunak was a wunderkind? His financial decision making in this parliament has been dire.
Whilst he's been found out at the top level by being promoted too quickly, a lot of it isn't his fault, really. You could reanimate a fusion of Thatcher, Churchill and Disraeli and they would struggle to lead the Conservative government right now.
The fallout of N years of poor decisions (where N is somewhere between 1 and 78, possibly more, depending on your political taste) is managing to land on Sunak all at once. Some of it is down to policies and people he has supported, but quite a lot isn't.
But Sunak hasn’t been powerless the last 5 years. As Chief Secretary he was sent out for Conservatives in the last big debate during last election. Before becoming PM he was Chancellor for most of this parliament.
If UK is trailing most of our equivalent world rivals across range of key economic metrics, growth, inflation, debt, quality of public services, how much of that should he own - just the bit from when he became Primeminister? Likewise, if his own rightwing tribe unhappy with borrowing, debt, interest rates, inflation and levels of tax right now, how much of that should Rishi Sunak own - just the bit since he became Primeminister?
It’s not just his awful record and unconvincing performances since becoming Primeminister; all things dragging the Tory polling down, years in the making, have Sunak’s fingerprints all over them.
25% for the Tories there though is higher than the 22% with Yougov
I have to admire that response!
Nothing to admire there, comparing apples with pears became Psephologicaly embarrassing before I was even born! YouGov fruit has ref and green on 9 at expense of larger parties. Overall picture is this slide for the Tories is becoming alarming now.
To be analytical, there was a commentary in “I” newspaper this week that Sunak has reshuffle problem because his cabinet is unpopular. I think he hasn’t even been in hot seat a year, much of this is electorate summing him up. I think Sunak is the Tory problem, immaturely over promising and under delivering really turning voters off.
What made people think Sunak was a wunderkind? His financial decision making in this parliament has been dire.
Whilst he's been found out at the top level by being promoted too quickly, a lot of it isn't his fault, really. You could reanimate a fusion of Thatcher, Churchill and Disraeli and they would struggle to lead the Conservative government right now.
The fallout of N years of poor decisions (where N is somewhere between 1 and 78, possibly more, depending on your political taste) is managing to land on Sunak all at once. Some of it is down to policies and people he has supported, but quite a lot isn't.
But Sunak hasn’t been powerless the last 5 years. As Chief Secretary he was sent out for Conservatives in the last big debate during last election. Before becoming PM he was Chancellor for most of this parliament.
If UK is trailing most of our equivalent world rivals across range of key economic metrics, growth, inflation, debt, quality of public services, how much of that should he own - just the bit from when he became Primeminister? Likewise, if his own rightwing tribe unhappy with borrowing, debt, interest rates, inflation and levels of tax right now, how much of that should Rishi Sunak own - just the bit since he became Primeminister?
It’s not just his awful record and unconvincing performances since becoming Primeminister; all things dragging the Tory polling down, years in the making, have Sunak’s fingerprints all over them.
One of your best posts. Rishi supported and then went on to administer, manage, and now leads, the government’s entire economic strategy.
“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.” - Hubert Humphrey
Seems that current Conservative HMG and Party is (at best) 0.5 of 3 by this scorecard.
Seeing as how the only ones mentioned that today's "true" Tories give a hoot about, are mortgage -holding elders?
I don't think Truss and Kwarteng did much for mortgage holders.
Minimum wage, state pension and benefits all up 10% however
Today's Tory party is a party for those on welfare, just the welfare is the pension.
Work for a living, and today's Tories don't care about you.
Trying to buy or pay off a house? Have kids? Running a British business? Work for a living?
A good week for Labour gaining from the Conservatives and Lib Dems.
The weekly average for the Conservatives is the lowest that it has been based on the weekly polls from all these six polling companies (ie December 2022).
Omnisis this week had Labour on 51%. The last poll with Labour on 51% was Omnisis on 12 May and then before then the next highest was again Omnisis with Labour on 50% at the end of March. For the past 3 months Omnisis has consistently had Labour more than 2% higher than the average.
Over the same period YouGov has the Conservatives 1.5-3% lower than average.
As the difference between polling companies is more than the statistical margin of error (6% for Conservatives this week), it is clear that there are particular house effects on the numbers. Consequently the trend for each polling company is worth considering, whilst comparing Conservative % between polling companies is like comparing Granny Smiths and Bramley Apples - they are similar but with noticeable differences.
“The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.” - Hubert Humphrey
Seems that current Conservative HMG and Party is (at best) 0.5 of 3 by this scorecard.
Seeing as how the only ones mentioned that today's "true" Tories give a hoot about, are mortgage -holding elders?
I don't think Truss and Kwarteng did much for mortgage holders.
Minimum wage, state pension and benefits all up 10% however
Today's Tory party is a party for those on welfare, just the welfare is the pension.
Work for a living, and today's Tories don't care about you.
More working for a living than the Tories inherited however.
8% unemployment under the last Labour government in 2010, now just 4%
I look at the polls and I see a country that is fucking traumatised and desperate.
Only the most complacent of pensioners - that stubborn rump of owner-occupiers who don’t perceive anything outside the darkened windows of the Daily Mail - still profess to supporting the Tories.
I want to try my "pay undocumented workers hundred of thousands of pounds and give them unlimited leave to remain, while giving them *legal* revenge on those who exploited them" policy.
I really relish the idea of someone trying to portray that as inhumane.
Apparently the writer of “the email” is some kind of pest. There’s a harassment case.
Any more details? source?
Twitter, obvs. People are hastily deleting posts etc.
It was definitely very odd. I couldn't read more than a couple of sentences without losing interest and scrolled down to see a wall of links to tweets.
A good week for Labour gaining from the Conservatives and Lib Dems.
The weekly average for the Conservatives is the lowest that it has been based on the weekly polls from all these six polling companies (ie December 2022).
Omnisis this week had Labour on 51%. The last poll with Labour on 51% was Omnisis on 12 May and then before then the next highest was again Omnisis with Labour on 50% at the end of March. For the past 3 months Omnisis has consistently had Labour more than 2% higher than the average.
Over the same period YouGov has the Conservatives 1.5-3% lower than average.
As the difference between polling companies is more than the statistical margin of error (6% for Conservatives this week), it is clear that there are particular house effects on the numbers. Consequently the trend for each polling company is worth considering, whilst comparing Conservative % between polling companies is like comparing Granny Smiths and Bramley Apples - they are similar but with noticeable differences.
I think doubling down on smashing it round the park is probably a good idea at this point in the innings. Wood's going to end up our 3rd highest scorer. Woakes is an allrounder, Wood is a 90 MPH+ pace bowler. He'd have been out for less than 24 with a less aggressive approach.
Australia are a better side than England atm. It's as simple as that.
Basically all fielding and confidence. Thats been the difference.
Taken their chances better and marginally better bowling attack (at least in the first two matches).
Comments
I mean what was that definition of insanity again?
Since the 10s of thousands of pledges, the Labour "controls on immigration" mugs, Rwanda, mouseless detention centres, and what have you.
It ain't going to happen.
Why do you lot never learn?
(And I think we needed a *large* first innings lead if we were to be competitive as tomorrow looks a bad day for batting and pitch maintenance.)
Where, and how, and at what cost ?
Only the most complacent of pensioners - that stubborn rump of owner-occupiers who don’t perceive anything outside the darkened windows of the Daily Mail - still profess to supporting the Tories.
My issue is that it is an expensive and futile boondoggle, dreamed up solely to “own the libs”.
It ain’t working.
Aus top 5 99-5
Mitch Marsh 118
Bottom 5 23-5
Eng top 5 69-5
Stokes 80
Bottom 5 67-5
To be analytical, there was a commentary in “I” newspaper this week that Sunak has reshuffle problem because his cabinet is unpopular. I think he hasn’t even been in hot seat a year, much of this is electorate summing him up. I think Sunak is the Tory problem, immaturely over promising and under delivering really turning voters off.
What made people think Sunak was a wunderkind? His financial decision making in this parliament has been dire.
Meanwhile, here in the U.K. we’re at the fag end of a tired incompetent government which chances are won’t be in power a year from now. The likely alternative may not be sparkly and exciting, but we’ll settle for competent and dull.
What are you going to end up with?
Credit to Labour for exploring ways of building more houses, mind you. That sort-of policy announcement, at least, I thought was worthy of consideration. The fact that it wasn't exactly what I would do doesn't alter the fact that it is possibly better than what we have now.
13.8 ! Shocking.
Then we'd have no chance in the cricket.
Preferably the Aussie test team...
https://www.espncricinfo.com/records/most-sixes-in-career-283122
Only Rohit Sharma, with 70 in only 50 tests, hit at anything like the same rate.
(And Pant, of course - 55 in 33 - and Afridi, 52 in 27.)
*£44.30. The whole of my skybet account.
BREAKING: Allison Bailey wins 20K costs in rare cost award by employment tribunal, Garden Court fails entirely in costs claim against her.
https://twitter.com/Jebadoo2/status/1677308251057139721?s=20
£20k is the maximum that can be awarded without a detailed investigation. Garden Court were claiming ~£250k from Bailey
The Referendum Party and UKIP still got almost a million votes combined in 1997 however and cost the Tories several seats
The fallout of N years of poor decisions (where N is somewhere between 1 and 78, possibly more, depending on your political taste) is managing to land on Sunak all at once. Some of it is down to policies and people he has supported, but quite a lot isn't.
(Broad should bring a carrot to hand to him next time.)
Terrified tots would be screaming for immediate deportation . . . on next flight to Orlando . . .
Giving Gov. Ron DeSantis yet another stick to beat up . . . his own so-called presidential campaign . . .
How many can this England side chase down if they set themselves to it? 250?
Pitch could get even flatter rather than stay seamy.
Thank you for your query of 07Jul2023 in which you mentioned pollsters using fake choices. You may be interested that there is a long history of pollsters using fictional candidates/bills/acts to assess their polls. Please see below for details.
Fictitious names used by opinion pollsters to check their polls
* Stewart Lewis
* Stuart Lewis
Fictitious bills/acts used by opinion pollsters to check their polls
* ‘Monetary Control Bill/Act"
* ‘Agricultural Trade Bill/Act"
* "Metallic Metals Bill/Act"
* "Public Affairs Bill/Act"
Some later became real.
Links
* https://twitter.com/jamesrwithers/status/1626652144337096707
* https://order-order.com/2015/06/18/ipsos-mori-stewart-lewis-polling-surprisingly-well/
* https://pollingreport.uk/articles/ipsos-moristandard-con-39-lab-30-ld-9-ukip-8-grn-6
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzrB-koRDGA
Cites:
* "Opinions on Fictitious Issues: The Pressure to Answer Survey Questions", Bishop et al (1986), Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2748887
* "Fictitious Issues Revisited: Political Interest, Knowledge and the Generation of Nonattitudes", Sturgis and Smith (2010), POLITICAL STUDIES: 2010 VOL 58, 66–84, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00773.x, link http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2008.00773.x/abstract
Stokes is great because he's a clever player. He can play 'Bazball', but he's equally confident to bat slowly and defend his wicket.
http://www.howstat.com/cricket/Statistics/Players/PlayerDismissBat.asp?PlayerID=0101
Angelo Matthews maybe closest, but less explosive and less often.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/july-2023/dont-hobble-the-house/
I like the point that there’s actually very little reflection on what New Labour’s reforms have delivered and the prudence of going further.
Members to be consulted, so strike action suspended.
Gov says the deal is worth £61.3m in additional pay for junior doctors. £3.5k increase for new doctors in 23/24
https://twitter.com/conor_matchett/status/1677317337907691522?s=20
CDU/CSU 27%
AfD 21%
SPD 18%
Green 14%
FDP 6%
Left 6%
Free Voters 1%
Others 6%
https://twitter.com/Wahlrecht_de/status/1677280239745990656
Seems that current Conservative HMG and Party is (at best) 0.5 of 3 by this scorecard.
Seeing as how the only ones mentioned that today's "true" Tories give a hoot about, are mortgage -holding elders?
LAB: 51% (+3)
CON: 25% (-1)
LDEM: 8% (-)
REF: 5% (-2)
GRN: 5% (-)
via
@Omnisis
, 06 - 07 Jul
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1677304929394864128
Minimum wage, state pension and benefits all up 10% however
Work for a living, and today's Tories don't care about you.
Now everyone does some variant of that correction. Labour's peak at the height of the Trusstershambles was 57% and they've just had a poll rating of 51% from Omnisis.
The future is not ours to see in advance, but right now the Conservatives are doing about as badly, and Labour about as well as in the mid 90s, if we don't compare apples with bananas.
And the worst of it for the Conservatives? They aren't losing badly to a genius of retail politics, they're losing badly to a boring old lefty lawyer.
If UK is trailing most of our equivalent world rivals across range of key economic metrics, growth, inflation, debt, quality of public services, how much of that should he own - just the bit from when he became Primeminister? Likewise, if his own rightwing tribe unhappy with borrowing, debt, interest rates, inflation and levels of tax right now, how much of that should Rishi Sunak own - just the bit since he became Primeminister?
It’s not just his awful record and unconvincing performances since becoming Primeminister; all things dragging the Tory polling down, years in the making, have Sunak’s fingerprints all over them.
Rishi supported and then went on to administer, manage, and now leads, the government’s entire economic strategy.
People are hastily deleting posts etc.
Have kids?
Running a British business?
Work for a living?
Then fuck off and join the Labour Party.
A good week for Labour gaining from the Conservatives and Lib Dems.
The weekly average for the Conservatives is the lowest that it has been based on the weekly polls from all these six polling companies (ie December 2022).
Omnisis this week had Labour on 51%. The last poll with Labour on 51% was Omnisis on 12 May and then before then the next highest was again Omnisis with Labour on 50% at the end of March. For the past 3 months Omnisis has consistently had Labour more than 2% higher than the average.
Over the same period YouGov has the Conservatives 1.5-3% lower than average.
As the difference between polling companies is more than the statistical margin of error (6% for Conservatives this week), it is clear that there are particular house effects on the numbers. Consequently the trend for each polling company is worth considering, whilst comparing Conservative % between polling companies is like comparing Granny Smiths and Bramley Apples - they are similar but with noticeable differences.
8% unemployment under the last Labour government in 2010, now just 4%
I really relish the idea of someone trying to portray that as inhumane.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/07/07/objects-roof-ukraine-nuclear-plant-fears-russia-attack/