I reckon for the next GE, take the Tory score and add Reform on (Bar a rump 2.5%). Knock a couple of % off Labour and give it to the Lib Dems (Tactical considerations when people actually come to vote). That'd give ~ 44-30-13 as of now - Labour majority of 156.
Which illustrates how poor the Tory position is - even giving a bit of swingback, reformers "coming home" it's still an absolute monstering.
If Starmer's interview on BBC this weekend is anything to go by there is going to be a lot of anger from the left of the party as he mimics Bair, but he is not Blair
Listening to Blair on Sophie Ridge yesterday, he reminded me why I voted for him and would today, but not Starmer despite being labelled a fiscal conservative by Kuenssberg
So that's simultaneously China, West Coast USA, and Southern Europe.
Nothing to see here, move along.
It is overwhelmingly likely, as CO2 levels continue to rise as rapidly as ever despite the hype and cars running on water, that the disaster predicted is already baked in, though exactly what form it can take is unknowable. If the science is right, it cannot now be averted. Planning and mitigation, and looking for the benefits, if any can be the only way.
You still see idiots posting about how it's just a heatwave, media have lost the plot etc. Records in 3 continents simultaneously is quite a thing.
The media's main focus was on cerberus hitting 48 in Italy this weekend. Whilst it was undoubtedly hot the media overdoomed on that particular heatwave.
I think these coming by elections should tell us more where the parties stand, real votes are better than 100 opinion polls. I fully expect the Lib dems to win fromerton, let's be honest, lib dems are good at winning by elections, if Labour win Selby that would be a real achievement, and would signal that the Tories are in real trouble, if Labour win Uxbridge but not Selby, there is a chance for the Tories,if the Tories hold Uxbridge and Selby, then I wouldn't be betting on a Labour majority
It is a bigger test for Starmer than Rishi. Conservative expectation management has been superb. Anything but two Labour wins looks like a massive victory for the Conservatives.
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
So that's simultaneously China, West Coast USA, and Southern Europe.
Nothing to see here, move along.
It is overwhelmingly likely, as CO2 levels continue to rise as rapidly as ever despite the hype and cars running on water, that the disaster predicted is already baked in, though exactly what form it can take is unknowable. If the science is right, it cannot now be averted. Planning and mitigation, and looking for the benefits, if any can be the only way.
You still see idiots posting about how it's just a heatwave, media have lost the plot etc. Records in 3 continents simultaneously is quite a thing.
I'd keep an eye on the temperatures in the Gulf of Mexico, which are also setting new records. If (when, probably) a tropical storm arrives or develops on those waters with reasonable organisation, the amount of energy it'll have to feed on will be phenomenal.
Any ideas for the US Open (Tennis), your Wimbledon prediction was spot on.
Hmm, tricky. The Alcaraz 'era' has begun. He's very special and I see him dominating for quite a while but it's in the price now. Re a bet for the US Open, I think laying Novak is value at about the 2.8 it seems to be. He doesn't usually win at Flushing Meadow, and it's an even tougher ask than usual for him after this. He's still formidable but I'd have him more like 4.
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
The LE results were a clear suggestion to me that:
a) Sunak's latest form of Tory Statism isn't popular b) CCHQ still don't realise this
I'm personally looking forward to the left of the party getting smashed, so we can return to proper right of centre pro-growth Conservatism at the subsequent election.
The belief that “Sunak was too left wing” is what will see the Conservatives in opposition for a decade.
Right this moment I'd say it is arguable that Starmer is further right than Sunak
I hope that includes a commitment to phase out PPE at Oxford and the MA in Public Policy at Birkbeck. Given the vast amounts their graduates cost the nation they're definitely a rip off.
Looks like both male and female creative arts graduates see a net fall in lifetime earnings after tax and loans on that chart. As do male graduates in social care and agriculture (albeit many of the latter will go on and takeover the family farm so it makes practical sense for them).
Medicine and economics graduates see lifetime boosts to average earnings of a huge £300-£450k (PPE includes economics of course, indeed Rishi worked for Goldman Sachs initially rather than become a SPAD)
It is a mistake to mix up trade school courses like medicine with general (even liberal arts) courses like English, Classics or Geography. The whole thing is overshadowed by biased recruitment from Oxbridge and the like. The government (and the economy) would do better to eliminate this in favour of getting the best people into the right jobs.
There are intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for going to university. Unless significant numbers of people study genuine stuff for its own sake - for intrinsic worth - then culturally our society dies a death of spirit, meaning, interest and ideas.
OTOH we need accountants and lawyers and engineers and loads of other things whether they love the stuff or not.
Courses which are both (medicine for vocational doctors etc) are safe. Courses which are neither (Stuff Studies at Dumpville) should never have existed.
I don't want to live in a country that doesn't value culture, knowledge, history, top academic work for its own sake. You always need someone who can edit and translate Sumerian poetry, and read Elamite cuneiform. Such things deserve protection, especially from Tories who only comprehend extrinsic worth in the shape of money.
I reckon for the next GE, take the Tory score and add Reform on (Bar a rump 2.5%). Knock a couple of % off Labour and give it to the Lib Dems (Tactical considerations when people actually come to vote). That'd give ~ 44-30-13 as of now - Labour majority of 156.
Which illustrates how poor the Tory position is - even giving a bit of swingback, reformers "coming home" it's still an absolute monstering.
If Starmer's interview on BBC this weekend is anything to go by there is going to be a lot of anger from the left of the party as he mimics Bair, but he is not Blair
Listening to Blair on Sophie Ridge yesterday, he reminded me why I voted for him and would today, but not Starmer despite being labelled a fiscal conservative by Kuenssberg
Not so sure. Left wing expectations of Starmer are so low that disappointment is already baked in to the figures.
We saw in yesterday's poll how the Tories main policy of Brexit polls. That will be the albatross around their neck for sometime yet. Their credibility on the economy is shot for a generation.
It is a pisspoor choice at the next GE, but the nation is skint, and anyone claiming otherwise is deluded.
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
Oh god, yes, I do remember. Like it was yesterday. I was working on a City trading floor and the exultation there made it all the worse. I went into my shell for a few days.
But I recognize your technique. That's what you're doing - bracing. The emotional hedge without the betting bit. You don't *really* expect it but you're prepping to protect your inner health. It's good. You do it with panache.
Starmer's challenge isn't hard left wazzocks - they never voted Labour anyway. Its from apathy. The country and the economy are massively broken, we can all see it, and as was observed above the Overton window of what could actually be done is very narrow.
With the Tories so terrible, but Starmer a bit meh and little that can be done, the threat is that people simply stay at home. This won't benefit the Tories (as I expect more actual genuine Conservatives to stay at home than any other demographic). But it will absolutely hinder Labour's chances.
I fear that Starmer is frit. Too afraid to throw away his "winning position" by producing any ideas or policies or visions of a better future. "We're less ban hammery than the other lot" isn't good enough.
The LE results were a clear suggestion to me that:
a) Sunak's latest form of Tory Statism isn't popular b) CCHQ still don't realise this
I'm personally looking forward to the left of the party getting smashed, so we can return to proper right of centre pro-growth Conservatism at the subsequent election.
The belief that “Sunak was too left wing” is what will see the Conservatives in opposition for a decade.
Right this moment I'd say it is arguable that Starmer is further right than Sunak
Arguably that's true, and is one reason why a Starmer govt will likely become unpopular very quickly. When people vote for a change government, they want things to change. As things stand, he won't deliver that other than in behaving better.
Improving the management of failure is not going to win him plaudits and is, in any case, an inconsistent and uninspiring message for the public: "vote for us; things are rubbish; we'll not change anything but will be more honest".
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
Oh god, yes, I do remember. Like it was yesterday. I was working on a City trading floor and the exultation there made it all the worse. I went into my shell for a few days.
But I recognize your technique. That's what you're doing - bracing. The emotional hedge without the betting bit. You don't *really* expect it but you're prepping to protect your inner health. It's good. You do it with panache.
At William Hill you can currently get 9/1 odds on a Conservative majority. Now that looks like value.
So that's simultaneously China, West Coast USA, and Southern Europe.
Nothing to see here, move along.
It is overwhelmingly likely, as CO2 levels continue to rise as rapidly as ever despite the hype and cars running on water, that the disaster predicted is already baked in, though exactly what form it can take is unknowable. If the science is right, it cannot now be averted. Planning and mitigation, and looking for the benefits, if any can be the only way.
You still see idiots posting about how it's just a heatwave, media have lost the plot etc. Records in 3 continents simultaneously is quite a thing.
The media's main focus was on cerberus hitting 48 in Italy this weekend. Whilst it was undoubtedly hot the media overdoomed on that particular heatwave.
Cos the journos have their Tuscan villas already booked for the summer, innit?
Starmer's challenge isn't hard left wazzocks - they never voted Labour anyway. Its from apathy. The country and the economy are massively broken, we can all see it, and as was observed above the Overton window of what could actually be done is very narrow.
With the Tories so terrible, but Starmer a bit meh and little that can be done, the threat is that people simply stay at home. This won't benefit the Tories (as I expect more actual genuine Conservatives to stay at home than any other demographic). But it will absolutely hinder Labour's chances.
I fear that Starmer is frit. Too afraid to throw away his "winning position" by producing any ideas or policies or visions of a better future. "We're less ban hammery than the other lot" isn't good enough.
Without fear of going all BJO on you I would like to condemn Starmer. Retaining the two child limit policy is a disgusting dereliction of duty.
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
This is quite a revealing comment. You were quite happy with the EU as it enforced constraints on the UK that would not be democratically voted for by the UK. Surely that is highly illiberal?
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
This is quite a revealing comment. You were quite happy with the EU as it enforced constraints on the UK that would not be democratically voted for by the UK. Surely that is highly illiberal?
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
By being signed up to EU some of the more illiberal populist nonsense that Braverman (in her dreams it would seem) might like to adopt into law would have been unavailable.
Reintroducing capital punishment for taxi- driver nonces or strafing the boats might get a cynical vote or two, but it would have been frowned upon by Brussels. Good old Brussels!
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
This is quite a revealing comment. You were quite happy with the EU as it enforced constraints on the UK that would not be democratically voted for by the UK. Surely that is highly illiberal?
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
By being signed up to EU some of the more illiberal populist nonsense that Braverman (in her dreams it would seem) might like to adopt into law would have been unavailable.
Reintroducing capital punishment for taxi- driver nonces or strafing the boats might get a cynical vote or two, but it would have been frowned upon by Brussels. Good old Brussels!
But, with respect, that answer is revealing of the problem so deeply embedded within what likes to see itself as the liberal centre-left that it doesn't even recognise what others can clearly see.
You're not making the case against these policies on their merits but would rather rely on external constraints to prevent their implementation. You assume that they're so self-evidently right that this isn't needed and yet also recognise that a popularly-elected government might want to do so anyway: there's a huge disconnect there. Inevitably, that situation also makes that external constraint unpopular, leading to a wider crisis of legitimacy for it and leaving the field free for the populist right to dominate.
All because you won't get down and engage in the debate in the first place.
I hope that includes a commitment to phase out PPE at Oxford and the MA in Public Policy at Birkbeck. Given the vast amounts their graduates cost the nation they're definitely a rip off.
Looks like both male and female creative arts graduates see a net fall in lifetime earnings after tax and loans on that chart. As do male graduates in social care and agriculture (albeit many of the latter will go on and takeover the family farm so it makes practical sense for them).
Medicine and economics graduates see lifetime boosts to average earnings of a huge £300-£450k (PPE includes economics of course, indeed Rishi worked for Goldman Sachs initially rather than become a SPAD)
It is a mistake to mix up trade school courses like medicine with general (even liberal arts) courses like English, Classics or Geography. The whole thing is overshadowed by biased recruitment from Oxbridge and the like. The government (and the economy) would do better to eliminate this in favour of getting the best people into the right jobs.
There are intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for going to university. Unless significant numbers of people study genuine stuff for its own sake - for intrinsic worth - then culturally our society dies a death of spirit, meaning, interest and ideas.
OTOH we need accountants and lawyers and engineers and loads of other things whether they love the stuff or not.
Courses which are both (medicine for vocational doctors etc) are safe. Courses which are neither (Stuff Studies at Dumpville) should never have existed.
I don't want to live in a country that doesn't value culture, knowledge, history, top academic work for its own sake. You always need someone who can edit and translate Sumerian poetry, and read Elamite cuneiform. Such things deserve protection, especially from Tories who only comprehend extrinsic worth in the shape of money.
The UK has a long-standing, traditional and successful university sector. Oddly, traditional and successful things are rarely valued by the Conservative Party…
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
This is quite a revealing comment. You were quite happy with the EU as it enforced constraints on the UK that would not be democratically voted for by the UK. Surely that is highly illiberal?
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
By being signed up to EU some of the more illiberal populist nonsense that Braverman (in her dreams it would seem) might like to adopt into law would have been unavailable.
Reintroducing capital punishment for taxi- driver nonces or strafing the boats might get a cynical vote or two, but it would have been frowned upon by Brussels. Good old Brussels!
This is the same eu that condones paying the libyan coast guard to turn migrants into indentured field workers. Would it?
The LE results were a clear suggestion to me that:
a) Sunak's latest form of Tory Statism isn't popular b) CCHQ still don't realise this
I'm personally looking forward to the left of the party getting smashed, so we can return to proper right of centre pro-growth Conservatism at the subsequent election.
The belief that “Sunak was too left wing” is what will see the Conservatives in opposition for a decade.
Right this moment I'd say it is arguable that Starmer is further right than Sunak
Arguably that's true, and is one reason why a Starmer govt will likely become unpopular very quickly. When people vote for a change government, they want things to change. As things stand, he won't deliver that other than in behaving better.
Improving the management of failure is not going to win him plaudits and is, in any case, an inconsistent and uninspiring message for the public: "vote for us; things are rubbish; we'll not change anything but will be more honest".
Indeed
I’m really struggling to find a way that Starmer is further left than Sunak. Fiscal reality means he cannot borrow, tax or spend more. He’s said this bluntly
He might - might - be more pro-EU but he seems to terrified of Brexit I doubt he will make any serious moves
His adoption of the “horribly Tory” two child policy means he’s very much in the Sunak zone on welfare. Wes Streeting’s announcement that we most not worship the NHS - it’s not an idol - means we might actually get more “market oriented” reform there than with the Tories
Ergo, Starmer could end up further right than Sunak, in government. Bit like that centrist El Salvador fella who turned into Franco (and is now enormously popular)
Starmer's challenge isn't hard left wazzocks - they never voted Labour anyway. Its from apathy. The country and the economy are massively broken, we can all see it, and as was observed above the Overton window of what could actually be done is very narrow.
With the Tories so terrible, but Starmer a bit meh and little that can be done, the threat is that people simply stay at home. This won't benefit the Tories (as I expect more actual genuine Conservatives to stay at home than any other demographic). But it will absolutely hinder Labour's chances.
I fear that Starmer is frit. Too afraid to throw away his "winning position" by producing any ideas or policies or visions of a better future. "We're less ban hammery than the other lot" isn't good enough.
Without fear of going all BJO on you I would like to condemn Starmer. Retaining the two child limit policy is a disgusting dereliction of duty.
As excuses go, this is on the level of remember that dog that ate the homework, went mad and shat all over the living room? We must not risk that happening again, even though we don’t have a dog.
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
This is quite a revealing comment. You were quite happy with the EU as it enforced constraints on the UK that would not be democratically voted for by the UK. Surely that is highly illiberal?
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
By being signed up to EU some of the more illiberal populist nonsense that Braverman (in her dreams it would seem) might like to adopt into law would have been unavailable.
Reintroducing capital punishment for taxi- driver nonces or strafing the boats might get a cynical vote or two, but it would have been frowned upon by Brussels. Good old Brussels!
This is delusional. Europe is heading for populist right or hard right governments everywhere. Soon enough this will be reflected in EU policies overall
The era of an obviously social democratic Europe is coming to an end
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
This is quite a revealing comment. You were quite happy with the EU as it enforced constraints on the UK that would not be democratically voted for by the UK. Surely that is highly illiberal?
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
By being signed up to EU some of the more illiberal populist nonsense that Braverman (in her dreams it would seem) might like to adopt into law would have been unavailable.
Reintroducing capital punishment for taxi- driver nonces or strafing the boats might get a cynical vote or two, but it would have been frowned upon by Brussels. Good old Brussels!
This is the same eu that condones paying the libyan coast guard to turn migrants into indentured field workers. Would it?
The EU doesn’t condone it.
It is EU policy.
Mind you, U.K. policy is to feed them Domino’s pizza. A percentage of which has pineapple as a topping.
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
This is quite a revealing comment. You were quite happy with the EU as it enforced constraints on the UK that would not be democratically voted for by the UK. Surely that is highly illiberal?
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
By being signed up to EU some of the more illiberal populist nonsense that Braverman (in her dreams it would seem) might like to adopt into law would have been unavailable.
Reintroducing capital punishment for taxi- driver nonces or strafing the boats might get a cynical vote or two, but it would have been frowned upon by Brussels. Good old Brussels!
This is the same eu that condones paying the libyan coast guard to turn migrants into indentured field workers. Would it?
The EU doesn’t condone it.
It is EU policy.
Mind you, U.K. policy is to feed them Domino’s pizza. A percentage of which has pineapple as a topping.
What is the betting that the posters lauding the eu as being more civillized than brexit britain would be screaming their lungs out if we did this policy?
'So: prediction time. I currently expect Labour to end up with 40-44 per cent of the vote, while the Tories win 31-35 per cent. If the result falls within those ranges, Labour will be the largest party, and has a 50-50 chance of securing an overall majority. However, these should be regarded like medium-term economic forecasts, subject to revision—and just as likely to be as wrong as the Bank of England’s recent inflation forecasts. Like economic forecasts, I shall be updating my predictions as the election draw near.'
Whether it's the great Kellner or somebody on here I'm never that bowled over by the above sort of thing. It's not a prediction at all. It's an artful way of discussing the election in a way that sounds authoritative and carries almost no risk of being wrong. You just keep updating your 'prediction' in line with the polls, caveated with the relevant error margins, and end up where almost everyone else is, never having gone anywhere exciting on the route there.
Not the way. Not for punditry and definitely not for betting. The way is to decide which of 2 camps you're in. Is this a sweeping change election where the Tories get their asses handed to them by the voters and the only question is the size of the Labour majority? Or is it a more workmanlike affair where the new boundaries, swingback, traditional distrust of Labour on the economy, lack of enthusiasm for them ('Starmer no Blair'), shy tories, tory campaigning prowess plus their media attack dogs, etc etc, where these factors combine to limit the Labour win to something wafer thin or to largest party in a hung parliament?
You have to jump one way or the other and you have to do this now (and be right obviously!) in order to secure big betting value. I've done this fwiw. I've jumped and where I've landed is slap bang in the 1st camp. Clear Labour win. Outright majority nailed on. More chance of a landslide than of a hung parliament.
Wishful thinking.
Starmer had a mare this weekend. If he can't think on his feet during a campaign he will shed the lead Theresa May style. The Conservatives' LauraK owned him yesterday. Blair was much better with Sophie Ridge.
I don't think so, Pete, because the bias I always have to fight in myself is the other way. The inclination to bet in a manner that will create profit if what I don't want to happen happens. The old 'emotional hedge'. Route to the poorhouse.
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
Do you remember the shock on the morning of Friday 10th April 1992? That sick pit in your stomach when you realised another 5 years of Conservative Governments was in view. I do, so I am bracing myself this time.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
This is quite a revealing comment. You were quite happy with the EU as it enforced constraints on the UK that would not be democratically voted for by the UK. Surely that is highly illiberal?
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
By being signed up to EU some of the more illiberal populist nonsense that Braverman (in her dreams it would seem) might like to adopt into law would have been unavailable.
Reintroducing capital punishment for taxi- driver nonces or strafing the boats might get a cynical vote or two, but it would have been frowned upon by Brussels. Good old Brussels!
This is the same eu that condones paying the libyan coast guard to turn migrants into indentured field workers. Would it?
The EU doesn’t condone it.
It is EU policy.
Mind you, U.K. policy is to feed them Domino’s pizza. A percentage of which has pineapple as a topping.
What is the betting that the posters lauding the eu as being more civillized than brexit britain would be screaming their lungs out if we did this policy?
I’m surprised at the lack of anger over the pineapple pizza, to be honest.
Four new w/e polls from Spain. Two showing comfortable and slightly rising support for the PP in the 9% lead range. Two others also see slightly rising support for PP but in the 3/4% lead range. No idea which, if any, are right but it could be the difference between a comfy PP/Vox majority or no feasible majority for any group apart from the Grand Coalition. I think the latter is unlikely and that, on balance the Socialists are going to lose... assuming things remain as they are.
For thise interested barely any sign there is a GE in my area with very few posters - the Spanish don't put them in their houses - anywhere. Basically we're all on hollibobs here and the politics is very much a sideshow.
The most striking thing in the Wikipedia graph is the rise of the PSOE vote...?
Nope as that is at the expense of Sumar, their more extreme left partner. So in seats overall of no benefit.
Comments
Listening to Blair on Sophie Ridge yesterday, he reminded me why I voted for him and would today, but not Starmer despite being labelled a fiscal conservative by Kuenssberg
And Sunak's no Blair either, is he? In fact the only Blair is Blair.
And this next Conservative Government of controlled decline will be so much worse without the constraints of the EU to keep it in check. We will come out of it with the most illiberal and populist administration we have ever seen in the UK, and somewhere around mid 2027 the reigns will be taken over by Badenoch, Braverman or Jenrick. Brace, brace!
OTOH we need accountants and lawyers and engineers and loads of other things whether they love the stuff or not.
Courses which are both (medicine for vocational doctors etc) are safe. Courses which are neither (Stuff Studies at Dumpville) should never have existed.
I don't want to live in a country that doesn't value culture, knowledge, history, top academic work for its own sake. You always need someone who can edit and translate Sumerian poetry, and read Elamite cuneiform. Such things deserve protection, especially from Tories who only comprehend extrinsic worth in the shape of money.
We saw in yesterday's poll how the Tories main policy of Brexit polls. That will be the albatross around their neck for sometime yet. Their credibility on the economy is shot for a generation.
It is a pisspoor choice at the next GE, but the nation is skint, and anyone claiming otherwise is deluded.
But I recognize your technique. That's what you're doing - bracing. The emotional hedge without the betting bit. You don't *really* expect it but you're prepping to protect your inner health. It's good. You do it with panache.
With the Tories so terrible, but Starmer a bit meh and little that can be done, the threat is that people simply stay at home. This won't benefit the Tories (as I expect more actual genuine Conservatives to stay at home than any other demographic). But it will absolutely hinder Labour's chances.
I fear that Starmer is frit. Too afraid to throw away his "winning position" by producing any ideas or policies or visions of a better future. "We're less ban hammery than the other lot" isn't good enough.
Improving the management of failure is not going to win him plaudits and is, in any case, an inconsistent and uninspiring message for the public: "vote for us; things are rubbish; we'll not change anything but will be more honest".
I think you will find that across Europe there are much more populist and illiberal elected governments than in the UK.
Reintroducing capital punishment for taxi- driver nonces or strafing the boats might get a cynical vote or two, but it would have been frowned upon by Brussels. Good old Brussels!
You're not making the case against these policies on their merits but would rather rely on external constraints to prevent their implementation. You assume that they're so self-evidently right that this isn't needed and yet also recognise that a popularly-elected government might want to do so anyway: there's a huge disconnect there. Inevitably, that situation also makes that external constraint unpopular, leading to a wider crisis of legitimacy for it and leaving the field free for the populist right to dominate.
All because you won't get down and engage in the debate in the first place.
I’m really struggling to find a way that Starmer is further left than Sunak. Fiscal reality means he cannot borrow, tax or spend more. He’s said this bluntly
He might - might - be more pro-EU but he seems to terrified of Brexit I doubt he will make any serious moves
His adoption of the “horribly Tory” two child policy means he’s very much in the Sunak zone on welfare. Wes Streeting’s announcement that we most not worship the NHS - it’s not an idol - means we might actually get more “market oriented” reform there than with the Tories
Ergo, Starmer could end up further right than Sunak, in government. Bit like that centrist El Salvador fella who turned into Franco (and is now enormously popular)
The era of an obviously social democratic Europe is coming to an end
It is EU policy.
Mind you, U.K. policy is to feed them Domino’s pizza. A percentage of which has pineapple as a topping.
Was that one of Sunak’s pledges?