Howdy, Stranger!

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

A little thought experiment for Sunday – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,161
edited October 2023 in General
imageA little thought experiment for Sunday – politicalbetting.com

My % chance of this happening though is "small"

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • First?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,829
    Second.

    Another option - no election but an emergency leading to a national coalition government and extension of the Pmt session.

    The tweet doesn't actually specify a GE ...
  • Rishi is also weak on defence though.
    Doesn’t want to pay for it.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

  • Rishi is also weak on defence though.
    Doesn’t want to pay for it.

    What does Rishi want to pay for? Other than payments to his core voters.

    On topic the only way I see this happening is something horrendous by Labour scaring the horses and causing voters to "cling to nurse for fear of worse".

    Again, odds are small. Especially with Starmer doing his best to not take a position on anything ever.

    If the likes of Khan and his attitude infected Labour nationwide then that'd be a bigger problem, which is why the Tories are trying to link Labour like that and why Starmer is trying not to be linked to that.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Overwhelming terror attack, AI taking over the planet, or aliens, in that order

    Or the sudden adoption of what3words by the entire world leading to renewed faith in British ideas, and a thumping majority for Rishi "Adolf" Sunak
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,145
    Last one before going in the garden.

    I think the one interesting decision that Rishi Sunak has made is the increase in heat pump grant to £7500, which means that for quite a lot of normal sized houses that would now cover the whole cost.

    He has not been clear about the numbers of grants available, however.
  • Labour publish a shadow budget in 2024, or manifesto for the election, which makes them look clueless and/or dangerous.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    edited September 2023
    The level of apathy, reflected in the DK/None numbers being in the 40-50% band for most issues, is going to be a problem for everyone.

    I’ll be betting on a low turnout, when the election eventually happens.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,145
    Grant Shapps seems to have forgotten that he is no longer Transport Minister, so I think he could lose that Conservative lead on Defence in short order.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    I don't see how everything going Day of the Oprichinik in Ukraine helps Sunak. Are people going to think, "Well done, you've just jizzed £5bn (and counting) up the wall for nothing. Here, have a vote."
  • First?

    Is what Rishi won't be.

    From here, he needs an event that somehow transforms the national perception of him.

    And the sort of crisis that makes us rally to his flag is not the sort of crisis I want to live through.

    (Though if Russia invaded East Anglia, he'd quite possibly consider selling them Norfolk and Suffolk to fund tax cuts.)
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,986
    “Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished” is maybe a tad unfair and Godwinish, but I get the gist.

    Putin is in a similar position now. Russia didn’t quite get the memo about the end of empire in 1991.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,986
    Sadly after several recent elections the most likely scenario leading to Sunak PM is probably some epic polling failure. It’ll turn out the country was dead happy with the Tory government after all and we were all just in our echo chambers kidding ourselves.
  • Inflation falls faster than expected despite wage growth staying strong, so voters feel better off. Sunak cuts taxes before the election and Labour is wrong-footed, with voters either thinking Starmer will put their taxes up or not really thinking Labour have any economic plan at all. Starmer falls flat in the debates, he looks old and grumpy, talking Britain down while Sunak's tigger-like tech bro optimism resonates. Sunak's promise to leave the ECHR to deal with a worsening small boats crisis is popular, and voters think Labour has no plan. The Tories successfully micro target constituencies with voters and spread hard to falsify scare messages about Labour's intentions. Some tight races are tilted the Tories' way by younger voters realising on the day they lack the right ID to vote. As the race tightens English voters worry about the SNP tail wagging the Labour dog. Labour panics and their message discipline breaks down, with the shadow cabinet briefing against Starmer. In the end the Tories hold onto 320 seats and Sunak does a deal with the DUP to stay in office.
    This kind of scenario isn't very likely but is far from impossible.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812

    Inflation falls faster than expected despite wage growth staying strong, so voters feel better off. Sunak cuts taxes before the election and Labour is wrong-footed, with voters either thinking Starmer will put their taxes up or not really thinking Labour have any economic plan at all. Starmer falls flat in the debates, he looks old and grumpy, talking Britain down while Sunak's tigger-like tech bro optimism resonates. Sunak's promise to leave the ECHR to deal with a worsening small boats crisis is popular, and voters think Labour has no plan. The Tories successfully micro target constituencies with voters and spread hard to falsify scare messages about Labour's intentions. Some tight races are tilted the Tories' way by younger voters realising on the day they lack the right ID to vote. As the race tightens English voters worry about the SNP tail wagging the Labour dog. Labour panics and their message discipline breaks down, with the shadow cabinet briefing against Starmer. In the end the Tories hold onto 320 seats and Sunak does a deal with the DUP to stay in office.
    This kind of scenario isn't very likely but is far from impossible.

    Its about as likely as Sunak rolling 10x6 in a row. I mean, its possible....
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249
    Dura_Ace said:

    I don't see how everything going Day of the Oprichinik in Ukraine helps Sunak. Are people going to think, "Well done, you've just jizzed £5bn (and counting) up the wall for nothing. Here, have a vote."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av-embeds/66887524/vpid/p0gg7thf

    Valuer for money all the way....
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,991
    edited September 2023
    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/sep/24/fa-brentford-owner-football-betting

    I am surprised this issue hasn't had more spotlight shone on it before. I could never quite fathom how two people who made their fortune out of gambling on football and set up companies whose only role seems to be is do data analysts for said individuals betting syndicates was not perhaps a bit of an issue (even if by the letter of the rules they have enough of an arms length to be ok e.g Tony Bloom isn't listed as the owner of Star Lizard, but....I mean...everybody knows what is going on, it isn't a big secret.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249

    Dura_Ace said:

    I don't see how everything going Day of the Oprichinik in Ukraine helps Sunak. Are people going to think, "Well done, you've just jizzed £5bn (and counting) up the wall for nothing. Here, have a vote."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av-embeds/66887524/vpid/p0gg7thf

    Valuer for money all the way....
    Just to add

    image
  • Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
  • I still remember the Beaconsfield by election of 1982. The Liberals were cruising to an easy victory, at the height of Thatcher's unpopularity. Then Galtieri invaded the Falklands. Within a few days, Liberal poster boards came down - when we asked why, the householders said, "Oh, it's different now, we have to support the Government!" Patriotism meant voting Conservative. On Polling Day, the Tories didn't wear blue rosettes, or anything overtly "political". No, what they did was wear blue tee-shirts with white writing on them which said "The Falklands are British"!
    So, if Mr Sunak is going to win another term, I suggest he gets Spain to invade Gibraltar or something like that. Without an obvious common enemy, he's toast.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    edited September 2023

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    It's a joke

    Tho Sunak is quite short, and an anti-smoker, and a vegetarian, who worships the swastika
  • Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    Sunak is not Hitler.

    Leon needing a sit down and a chill pill is nothing new.

    At least its not bloody aliens or lab leak or whatever today.
  • Labour publish a shadow budget in 2024, or manifesto for the election, which makes them look clueless and/or dangerous.

    Labour are doing well because of their message discipline, which let's people project onto them what they'd like to believe is true, and the fact they are keeping their real cards extremely close to their chests.

    There are no easy answers and they are no more able to escape political and economic reality than anyone else.

    The next few years are not going to be fun.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,748
    I think in the event of a nuclear war people might want someone a bit more competent than Sunak in charge.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    How can Rishi be PM in Feb 2025. Let's ignore the absolutely unlikely things - aliens, WWIII, nuclear conflagration, bubonic plague wiping out London etc.

    It reduces to one central factor: Either the Labour or Tory leader will be PM in Feb 2025. It isn't complicated. The Labour leader will be PM unless the Tories get approximately 314 seats. (314+8 DUP = 322. 321 is a majority if Speaker + 7 SFs don't count. 650-8=642).

    The Tories therefore cannot lose more than 51 seats. 365-51=314.

    In normal circumstances this is quite doable. But these times are not normal.

    It would take a lot of these:
    Iron discipline in the party.
    A united Tory front.
    No scandals.
    Reform to be marginalised.
    Some economic luck.
    A year of free gift populist policies to the centre right.
    Labour to divide between left and right.
    A united right wing press/media campaign.
    Labour scandals
    Sir K to be discredited, and probably replaced.

    And, hopefully, it still wouldn't succeed.
  • Inflation falls faster than expected despite wage growth staying strong, so voters feel better off. Sunak cuts taxes before the election and Labour is wrong-footed, with voters either thinking Starmer will put their taxes up or not really thinking Labour have any economic plan at all. Starmer falls flat in the debates, he looks old and grumpy, talking Britain down while Sunak's tigger-like tech bro optimism resonates. Sunak's promise to leave the ECHR to deal with a worsening small boats crisis is popular, and voters think Labour has no plan. The Tories successfully micro target constituencies with voters and spread hard to falsify scare messages about Labour's intentions. Some tight races are tilted the Tories' way by younger voters realising on the day they lack the right ID to vote. As the race tightens English voters worry about the SNP tail wagging the Labour dog. Labour panics and their message discipline breaks down, with the shadow cabinet briefing against Starmer. In the end the Tories hold onto 320 seats and Sunak does a deal with the DUP to stay in office.
    This kind of scenario isn't very likely but is far from impossible.

    Probably the best thing the Tories could achieve to save their core vote is to end the boat crossings.
  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,457
    FPT:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    .

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    FPT

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    The whole HS2 debacle is infuriating. What an utter bunch of idiots in charge. Absolutely no idea what Sunak or Hunt are thinking

    The optics are shockingly poor. At least Sunak has his helicopter I guess

    There's a lot of disruption in my area from HS2, and it would be ridiculous to stop building it now because it would mean all of that inconvenience has been for nothing.
    Sunk cost fallacy. As someone pointed out a few weeks ago, could be an incredible London - Birmingham cycle track ;)
    Have it a dual motorway and separated cycle path and it'd absolutely be far better value for money than rail. 👍

    Can't cycle on a motorway of course, but I see no reason you couldn't have separate cycle paths that go next to motorway routes.
    We did have segregated cycle lanes on A roads built in the 70s, but these have largely been built on now.

    Let's restore the cycle mileage we had in the 50s (8x what it is today) and then we can talk about new roads 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
    OK let's restore the cycle mileage we had in the 50s before talking about new roads.

    But of course we'll also need to restore the population back to what we had in the 50s. So who are the 17 million people you'd like to deport?

    And of course we'll also need to restore the GDP per capita back closer to what we had in the 50s, since transportation infrastructure is critical in growing the economy. GDP per capita by PPP was about 30% of what it is today in the 50s.

    Or we can live in the real world where growing population and growing the economy means we need infrastructure. In which case lets have roads and cycle paths built.
    Aye, Dutch GDP per capita is a disaster.

    (The 8x was adjusted for population. On deportation - don't give Mr Sunak ideas)
    The Dutch have been building roads. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

    The Dutch have massively more roads than we have per capita and per square mile. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

    I support a Dutch policy of building roads and cycle paths. For some perverted reason you don't.
    Find the quote where I was against cycle paths on new roads (third time I've asked).
    Here you go:
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Andy_JS said:

    The whole HS2 debacle is infuriating. What an utter bunch of idiots in charge. Absolutely no idea what Sunak or Hunt are thinking

    The optics are shockingly poor. At least Sunak has his helicopter I guess

    There's a lot of disruption in my area from HS2, and it would be ridiculous to stop building it now because it would mean all of that inconvenience has been for nothing.
    Sunk cost fallacy. As someone pointed out a few weeks ago, could be an incredible London - Birmingham cycle track ;)
    Have it a dual motorway and separated cycle path and it'd absolutely be far better value for money than rail. 👍

    Can't cycle on a motorway of course, but I see no reason you couldn't have separate cycle paths that go next to motorway routes.
    We did have segregated cycle lanes on A roads built in the 70s, but these have largely been built on now.

    Let's restore the cycle mileage we had in the 50s (8x what it is today) and then we can talk about new roads 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
    No new roads = no new cycle paths to go with those roads.

    Its not either/or, its not zero sum, we need both. We need investment in our infrastructure, we need roads and cycle paths. Its not feasible given our population growth to do one without the other, we need to stop dicking about and invest in our infrastructure and do both.
    Why did you make up a thing about me not wanting cycle paths on new roads?
    I didn't.

    You have said time and again you are opposed to new roads. If there's no new roads built, there's no cycle paths built with new roads.

    To get cycle paths built with new roads, you need to agree to the new roads, can't have one without the other.

    So are you in favour of new roads and new cycle paths? If so, great, we can stop arguing, because that's what I've been advocating all along!
    I'm in favour of cycle lanes on new roads.

    Most British cities and towns already have the "new road". You can tell because they smashed them up in the 70s. We didn't bother to transform the centres at the same time like the Dutch did. Glasgow is a good example (Buchanan Street aside). Let's catch up!

    Some towns don't have a bypass. Nairn is an example. The A96 should be bypassed and the centre should be pedestrianised, with the surrounding roads fitted with cycle lanes.
    The 70s were before I was born and our population has grown by 13 million, roughly 25%, since the 70s.

    If you're counting the 70s as "new" I think I can understand your fallacy.
    I'm just pointing out that the Dutch started putting their cycle lanes in the 70s. We just didn't bother, even has we built more roads over the last 50 years.

    It's you who seems to think no road building has happened since the 70s. Weird.
    Absolutely insignificant road building has happened since the 70s, compared to our population growth.

    Richard_Tyndall put a list of "major" new roads over the past decade on here the other day and it was pathetic tinkering at the edges. Incomparable to the fact our population has grown almost 10% since 2010, or 25% since the 1970s. Actually its over 20% nearly that 25% since 1997.

    Our population has grown considerably, our infrastructure has not kept pace.

    We haven't got enough roads, or cycle paths, houses or most other infrastructure compared to our population growth that's occurred.

    There's no way to reverse that without committing to spending. There is no free lunch here.
    What do you want - a road each?
    No, I want investment to keep up with population growth. Its not rocket science, if our population grows, our infrastructure and housing stock etc needs to grow accordingly.
    I thought you were a fan of productivity growth? Why not try to find ways of providing that infrastructure at reduced cost and more efficiently?

    Driving two tonne, single occupanT, living room sized boxes of steel two miles to work is ANTI-GROWTH.
    If you want to work in R&D to find a more productive alternative to transport infrastructure then be my guest, but none have been discovered yet.

    Which is why we need to invest in what does exist.

    Roads are critical transport infrastructure, which is why the Dutch have considerably more roads per square km and per population than we do.

    Building roads allows building cycle paths too, as the Dutch know.

    If you want to follow Dutch policy then do so, and lets start investing. Its not either/or, its both.
    Every time someone like me uses a bike or bus to commute to work, they leave more space on the road for people like you on your 25 mile car commute.

    That's productivity growth. More with less.

    And you're welcome 🥰

    That depends.

    On a dedicated cycle path segregated from but next to the road? Absolutely you're completely correct, and I 100% support building those with new roads.

    On a shared single lane each direction road? No, that's not the case. Length wise the cyclist takes the same space as a small car so no space saved, width wise it's less but unless the road is wide enough to fit both it's not safe to drive alongside and overtake a cyclist in the same lane of traffic most of the time.

    Yes if I'm behind a cyclist I can overtake it, and I will. But I also need to do so safely, which means slowing down to the cyclists speed if there's oncoming traffic and then overtaking when there's a gap in the oncoming traffic.

    Which means that the cyclist simply slows down traffic and no space is saved. Unless you want me to overtake the cyclist dangerously, but I don't think either of us want that now do we?

    Which is why again there's no alternative to building both roads AND cycle paths. We need both.
    Nonsense. On my commute I overtake more cars than overtake me (roughly 60:5). And those who do overtake me find my calves flexed in front of them soon after.

    But if you're worried about cyclists holding you up, why not provide a nice cycle lane? Costs significantly less than your £1 trillion road building project.
    Leave your city bubble and try and overtake cars.

    I completely support building cycle lanes alongside new roads. But no it doesn't cost less to do so, both need doing. If anything it increases costs to aid better cycling but I support that as I'm pro choice and want to support people's choice to cycle even if it costs a bit more.
    Why not pop one alongside an existing
    road?

    You're pro-road, that's all. You'd spend £1 trillion on them instead of investing in housing.
    Where alongside an existing road?

    Undeveloped land? Absolutely go for it. For rural roads that's an option.

    But if there's houses or gardens or shops alongside the road would you bulldoze them?

    It’s not either/or, we need both. We need infrastructure AND housing. Our population has grown by a quarter in a generation but our last major investment in our infrastructure was two generations ago. We desperately need both now.

    Be smart and you can include public transport too.

    Build new towns and cities, with arterial roads which have a cycle path, road lanes for cars and tram tracks down the middle, with LTNs off the arteries for housing.
    The Elizabeth Line and Thames Tideway are both recent. T5 was 15 years ago as well.!
    The Elizabeth Line, Thames Tideway, T5 and the London Olympics were, are or are on course to all be very successful projects.
    So you're suggesting investing in infrastructure works? I seem to be detecting a common thread in the geography of those projects.

    Can you name the top infrastructure investment in the past decade or two in the North that have been successful projects?

    Our population has grown by a quarter, our infrastructure has not kept up.
    WCML was late and vastly over budget but eventually worked.

    The line up to Manchester used to be dire.
    Wasn't it massively descoped to get it built, though?

    So we spent far more than we would have if the limited-scope version had been planned in the first place. And the requirement for HS2 arises partly from the lack of capacity that would have been provided by the full-fat WCML upgrade if it had gone ahead.

    So, sure, not a failure as such - more of an open question, pending the decision on HS2 Phase 2.
  • TimS said:

    “Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished” is maybe a tad unfair and Godwinish, but I get the gist.

    Putin is in a similar position now. Russia didn’t quite get the memo about the end of empire in 1991.

    Sunak is Hitler and Putin is what you get when this site becomes an angry echo chamber, with everyone putting the boot in, and those offering an alternative viewpoint getting fingered as enablers or bullied off.

    It's exactly where we're at.
  • Sandpit said:

    The level of apathy, reflected in the DK/None numbers being in the 40-50% band for most issues, is going to be a problem for everyone.

    I’ll be betting on a low turnout, when the election eventually happens.

    When you get under the skin Labour's polling and numbers are shit, it's just for Sunak and the Tories they are utterly diabolical.

    It points to Starmer's Labour dropping back to c.30% polling within 9-12 months of taking office.
  • Well the most likely "black swan" event before January 2025 would be a Trump victory in November 2024.
    So if Sunak made the popular choice in response to that (though eff knows what that would be), while Starmer took the opposite view, then who knows?
    The trouble is Sunak seems quite incapable of reading a room.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    It's a joke

    Tho Sunak is quite short, and an anti-smoker, and a vegetarian, who worships the swastika
    And both dog owners with occasional enthusiasm for armed conflict west of the Dnepr. The parallels are there for all except those who refuse to see them
  • TimS said:

    “Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished” is maybe a tad unfair and Godwinish, but I get the gist.

    Putin is in a similar position now. Russia didn’t quite get the memo about the end of empire in 1991.

    Sunak is Hitler and Putin is what you get when this site becomes an angry echo chamber, with everyone putting the boot in, and those offering an alternative viewpoint getting fingered as enablers or bullied off.

    It's exactly where we're at.
    Or when Leon tries desperately to be funny and edgy.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401

    Inflation falls faster than expected despite wage growth staying strong, so voters feel better off. Sunak cuts taxes before the election and Labour is wrong-footed, with voters either thinking Starmer will put their taxes up or not really thinking Labour have any economic plan at all. Starmer falls flat in the debates, he looks old and grumpy, talking Britain down while Sunak's tigger-like tech bro optimism resonates. Sunak's promise to leave the ECHR to deal with a worsening small boats crisis is popular, and voters think Labour has no plan. The Tories successfully micro target constituencies with voters and spread hard to falsify scare messages about Labour's intentions. Some tight races are tilted the Tories' way by younger voters realising on the day they lack the right ID to vote. As the race tightens English voters worry about the SNP tail wagging the Labour dog. Labour panics and their message discipline breaks down, with the shadow cabinet briefing against Starmer. In the end the Tories hold onto 320 seats and Sunak does a deal with the DUP to stay in office.
    This kind of scenario isn't very likely but is far from impossible.

    And then what would they do? And where would we be? Another 5 years of the same faces lining their own and their mates' pockets without any intention or ambition of doing anything else.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,829
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    It's a joke

    Tho Sunak is quite short, and an anti-smoker, and a vegetarian, who worships the swastika
    Nah, you've got it completely wrong, unfair, etc.. Doggies is where it's at politically these days, as you know, and he has a Labrador. Not a German Shepherd.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    edited September 2023
    DavidL said:

    Inflation falls faster than expected despite wage growth staying strong, so voters feel better off. Sunak cuts taxes before the election and Labour is wrong-footed, with voters either thinking Starmer will put their taxes up or not really thinking Labour have any economic plan at all. Starmer falls flat in the debates, he looks old and grumpy, talking Britain down while Sunak's tigger-like tech bro optimism resonates. Sunak's promise to leave the ECHR to deal with a worsening small boats crisis is popular, and voters think Labour has no plan. The Tories successfully micro target constituencies with voters and spread hard to falsify scare messages about Labour's intentions. Some tight races are tilted the Tories' way by younger voters realising on the day they lack the right ID to vote. As the race tightens English voters worry about the SNP tail wagging the Labour dog. Labour panics and their message discipline breaks down, with the shadow cabinet briefing against Starmer. In the end the Tories hold onto 320 seats and Sunak does a deal with the DUP to stay in office.
    This kind of scenario isn't very likely but is far from impossible.

    Its about as likely as Sunak rolling 10x6 in a row. I mean, its possible....
    10x6 on dice is lottery-winning odds, 60.5m to 1

    I’ll start with tossing a coin 10 heads in a row, because that can actually happen.
    (There’s a video out there of Derren Brown doing it, took him something like nine hours of tossing a coin!).
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    What's with the Britain's exit from the EU question?
    May as well ask which leader is better to deal with Suez.
  • TimS said:

    “Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished” is maybe a tad unfair and Godwinish, but I get the gist.

    Putin is in a similar position now. Russia didn’t quite get the memo about the end of empire in 1991.

    Sunak is Hitler and Putin is what you get when this site becomes an angry echo chamber, with everyone putting the boot in, and those offering an alternative viewpoint getting fingered as enablers or bullied off.

    It's exactly where we're at.
    I'm not one to put much stock in "likes" but the fact that Leon's absurdity got zero likes and pretty much a tumbleweed response is rather indicative that people are clued up to Leon's trolling and its not representative of views on Sunak.

    Sunak is an awful PM. He's no Hitler, the UK has never had a Hitler.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    Sandpit said:

    The level of apathy, reflected in the DK/None numbers being in the 40-50% band for most issues, is going to be a problem for everyone.

    I’ll be betting on a low turnout, when the election eventually happens.

    I think the DK/None figures are not apathy but more a genuine sense that politics is insufficiently serious about communicating long term aims and goals and how to get there.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    edited September 2023
    algarkirk said:

    How can Rishi be PM in Feb 2025. Let's ignore the absolutely unlikely things - aliens, WWIII, nuclear conflagration, bubonic plague wiping out London etc.

    It reduces to one central factor: Either the Labour or Tory leader will be PM in Feb 2025. It isn't complicated. The Labour leader will be PM unless the Tories get approximately 314 seats. (314+8 DUP = 322. 321 is a majority if Speaker + 7 SFs don't count. 650-8=642).

    The Tories therefore cannot lose more than 51 seats. 365-51=314.

    In normal circumstances this is quite doable. But these times are not normal.

    It would take a lot of these:
    Iron discipline in the party.
    A united Tory front.
    No scandals.
    Reform to be marginalised.
    Some economic luck.
    A year of free gift populist policies to the centre right.
    Labour to divide between left and right.
    A united right wing press/media campaign.
    Labour scandals
    Sir K to be discredited, and probably replaced.

    And, hopefully, it still wouldn't succeed.

    8 DUP seems to be taken as read in these calculations...
    There's a significant chance it might be fewer.
    7 SF could be more or less, too.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277

    TimS said:

    “Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished” is maybe a tad unfair and Godwinish, but I get the gist.

    Putin is in a similar position now. Russia didn’t quite get the memo about the end of empire in 1991.

    Sunak is Hitler and Putin is what you get when this site becomes an angry echo chamber, with everyone putting the boot in, and those offering an alternative viewpoint getting fingered as enablers or bullied off.

    It's exactly where we're at.
    I am much more minded to side with you than most people here, not least on things like Wokeness (which I probably find even more sinister and pernicious than you). I also find the PB lefties annoying in their herding

    But the fact is the Tories have been in power for 13 largely ineffective, increasingly incompetent years and now the country overwhelmingly wants them gone, either with sorrow or with anger - and PB merely reflects that. Moreover, the Tories seem to be doing everything possible to annoy every single last pocket of support (except for those frigging rich pensioners)

    They aren't even tackling Wokeness or defending Britishness, so people like me think "what's the effing point of them". They can't even stop a single boat

    Enough. Let them be gone. Let them rebuild after they are chopped down to the ground, like the wonderful plane trees in Euston Square, razed and killed for HS2, which now might never actually get to Euston Square

    You are not being persecuted. You are merely in a seriously SMALL minority of people that actively want the Tories to win
  • Sandpit said:

    The level of apathy, reflected in the DK/None numbers being in the 40-50% band for most issues, is going to be a problem for everyone.

    I’ll be betting on a low turnout, when the election eventually happens.

    When you get under the skin Labour's polling and numbers are shit, it's just for Sunak and the Tories they are utterly diabolical.

    It points to Starmer's Labour dropping back to c.30% polling within 9-12 months of taking office.
    Doesn't necessarily matter. Thatcher's mid term tended to be around that level.

    If Starmer can plausibly point to things being better in 2028/9, Labour will win again. That's even if the Conservatives have got their act together, which I'm expecting to take longer than that. For a start, it needs someone on the Conservative side to tell the party some hone truths, and I don't see who that is.

    Eight years doesn't take long if you say it quickly.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,552

    I still remember the Beaconsfield by election of 1982. The Liberals were cruising to an easy victory, at the height of Thatcher's unpopularity. Then Galtieri invaded the Falklands. Within a few days, Liberal poster boards came down - when we asked why, the householders said, "Oh, it's different now, we have to support the Government!" Patriotism meant voting Conservative. On Polling Day, the Tories didn't wear blue rosettes, or anything overtly "political". No, what they did was wear blue tee-shirts with white writing on them which said "The Falklands are British"!
    So, if Mr Sunak is going to win another term, I suggest he gets Spain to invade Gibraltar or something like that. Without an obvious common enemy, he's toast.

    I uploaded some footage from the Beaconsfield by-election a few years ago. Starts at 16 mins 54 secs.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVKIFfwWRg8
  • TimS said:

    “Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished” is maybe a tad unfair and Godwinish, but I get the gist.

    Putin is in a similar position now. Russia didn’t quite get the memo about the end of empire in 1991.

    Sunak is Hitler and Putin is what you get when this site becomes an angry echo chamber, with everyone putting the boot in, and those offering an alternative viewpoint getting fingered as enablers or bullied off.

    It's exactly where we're at.
    I'm not one to put much stock in "likes" but the fact that Leon's absurdity got zero likes and pretty much a tumbleweed response is rather indicative that people are clued up to Leon's trolling and its not representative of views on Sunak.

    Sunak is an awful PM. He's no Hitler, the UK has never had a Hitler.
    I think Leon was trying to be funny.
    I actually smiled at Rishi “Adolf” Sunak.

    CasinoRoyale has the sense of humour one expects from a venison-twitching young fogey with a persecution complex.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,986
    edited September 2023

    TimS said:

    “Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished” is maybe a tad unfair and Godwinish, but I get the gist.

    Putin is in a similar position now. Russia didn’t quite get the memo about the end of empire in 1991.

    Sunak is Hitler and Putin is what you get when this site becomes an angry echo chamber, with everyone putting the boot in, and those offering an alternative viewpoint getting fingered as enablers or bullied off.

    It's exactly where we're at.
    I'm not one to put much stock in "likes" but the fact that Leon's absurdity got zero likes and pretty much a tumbleweed response is rather indicative that people are clued up to Leon's trolling and its not representative of views on Sunak.

    Sunak is an awful PM. He's no Hitler, the UK has never had a Hitler.
    He’s riffing on an analogy to partial defeat followed by total defeat, that’s all.

    Some people think automatically in metaphors and analogies. It’s how some brains sort out and understand patterns. Particularly common in writers.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277

    TimS said:

    “Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished” is maybe a tad unfair and Godwinish, but I get the gist.

    Putin is in a similar position now. Russia didn’t quite get the memo about the end of empire in 1991.

    Sunak is Hitler and Putin is what you get when this site becomes an angry echo chamber, with everyone putting the boot in, and those offering an alternative viewpoint getting fingered as enablers or bullied off.

    It's exactly where we're at.
    I'm not one to put much stock in "likes" but the fact that Leon's absurdity got zero likes and pretty much a tumbleweed response is rather indicative that people are clued up to Leon's trolling and its not representative of views on Sunak.

    Sunak is an awful PM. He's no Hitler, the UK has never had a Hitler.
    I don't actually believe Rishi Sunak is Adolf Hitler. I was satirising my own tendency to hyperbole

    I thought this was fairly clear when I compared Liz Truss to the Late Weimar hyperinflation
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,748

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    No, I think for once Leon may be on to something.

    David Cameron was Bismarck, Theresa May was Kaiser Bill, Boris Johnson was the Weimar Republic, Sunak is Hitler, Jacob Rees-Mogg is Goebbels and Suella Braun is Eva Braverman. It all makes perfect sense.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    Andy_JS said:

    I still remember the Beaconsfield by election of 1982. The Liberals were cruising to an easy victory, at the height of Thatcher's unpopularity. Then Galtieri invaded the Falklands. Within a few days, Liberal poster boards came down - when we asked why, the householders said, "Oh, it's different now, we have to support the Government!" Patriotism meant voting Conservative. On Polling Day, the Tories didn't wear blue rosettes, or anything overtly "political". No, what they did was wear blue tee-shirts with white writing on them which said "The Falklands are British"!
    So, if Mr Sunak is going to win another term, I suggest he gets Spain to invade Gibraltar or something like that. Without an obvious common enemy, he's toast.

    I uploaded some footage from the Beaconsfield by-election a few years ago. Starts at 16 mins 54 secs.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVKIFfwWRg8
    From memory wasn't the also ran for Labour one ACL Blair?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    It's a joke

    Tho Sunak is quite short, and an anti-smoker, and a vegetarian, who worships the swastika
    And both dog owners with occasional enthusiasm for armed conflict west of the Dnepr. The parallels are there for all except those who refuse to see them
    Quite so
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    Anybody who now doesn’t refer to him 'Sunatler' is woke.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,552
    dixiedean said:

    Andy_JS said:

    I still remember the Beaconsfield by election of 1982. The Liberals were cruising to an easy victory, at the height of Thatcher's unpopularity. Then Galtieri invaded the Falklands. Within a few days, Liberal poster boards came down - when we asked why, the householders said, "Oh, it's different now, we have to support the Government!" Patriotism meant voting Conservative. On Polling Day, the Tories didn't wear blue rosettes, or anything overtly "political". No, what they did was wear blue tee-shirts with white writing on them which said "The Falklands are British"!
    So, if Mr Sunak is going to win another term, I suggest he gets Spain to invade Gibraltar or something like that. Without an obvious common enemy, he's toast.

    I uploaded some footage from the Beaconsfield by-election a few years ago. Starts at 16 mins 54 secs.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVKIFfwWRg8
    From memory wasn't the also ran for Labour one ACL Blair?
    Yes, he's in the video, campaigning with Michael Foot.
  • Chris said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    No, I think for once Leon may be on to something.

    David Cameron was Bismarck, Theresa May was Kaiser Bill, Boris Johnson was the Weimar Republic, Sunak is Hitler, Jacob Rees-Mogg is Goebbels and Suella Braun is Eva Braverman. It all makes perfect sense.
    So all the Conservatives need to do is be divided among four of their opponents for a bit (Labour, Lib Dems, Greens and Reform?) while they totally rebase things, before a miracle recovery in a decade or so?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,829
    Cyclefree said:

    Shall I chat about good autumn bulbs to buy, proper Italian recipes and how naughty lawyers working for the Post Office have been to calm everyone down?

    Not sure that the last bit would help ... except in providing something we can all agree about on PB (unless there is some contrarian: there usually is).
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,986
    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    No, I think for once Leon may be on to something.

    David Cameron was Bismarck, Theresa May was Kaiser Bill, Boris Johnson was the Weimar Republic, Sunak is Hitler, Jacob Rees-Mogg is Goebbels and Suella Braun is Eva Braverman. It all makes perfect sense.
    You know who else once promised to stop the boats in the English Channel?


  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    algarkirk said:

    Sandpit said:

    The level of apathy, reflected in the DK/None numbers being in the 40-50% band for most issues, is going to be a problem for everyone.

    I’ll be betting on a low turnout, when the election eventually happens.

    I think the DK/None figures are not apathy but more a genuine sense that politics is insufficiently serious about communicating long term aims and goals and how to get there.

    I think there’s a general disillusionment across the Western world at the moment. Incumbents everywhere are unpopular and getting turfed out at election time, but there doesn’t seem to be anyone with any real ideas about the way forward.

    I think there’s also a lack of talent putting themselves forward for office, as the negatives now far outweigh the positives, so all we are seeing is career political animals in all major parties.

    At least British politics isn’t yet quite as broken as American politics.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    edited September 2023
    Dura_Ace said:

    Anybody who now doesn’t refer to him 'Sunatler' is woke.

    Likewise "Jeremy Himmlunt" as Sunatler's sidekick

    I can see this meme really taking off and becoming common parlance among ordinary, decent working people
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    edited September 2023

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    No, I think for once Leon may be on to something.

    David Cameron was Bismarck, Theresa May was Kaiser Bill, Boris Johnson was the Weimar Republic, Sunak is Hitler, Jacob Rees-Mogg is Goebbels and Suella Braun is Eva Braverman. It all makes perfect sense.
    So all the Conservatives need to do is be divided among four of their opponents for a bit (Labour, Lib Dems, Greens and Reform?) while they totally rebase things, before a miracle recovery in a decade or so?
    Yes, but first we need to bomb Conservative Party HQ into oblivion.

    There will likely be civilian casualties, but since the civilians in questions will be a bunch of hooray henries with a masturbatory interest in small boats, that’s a price I’m willing to pay.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    edited September 2023

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    No, I think for once Leon may be on to something.

    David Cameron was Bismarck, Theresa May was Kaiser Bill, Boris Johnson was the Weimar Republic, Sunak is Hitler, Jacob Rees-Mogg is Goebbels and Suella Braun is Eva Braverman. It all makes perfect sense.
    So all the Conservatives need to do is be divided among four of their opponents for a bit (Labour, Lib Dems, Greens and Reform?) while they totally rebase things, before a miracle recovery in a decade or so?
    Yes, but first we need to bomb Conservative Party HQ into oblivion.

    There will likely be civilian casualties, but since the civilians in questions will be a bunch of hooray henries with a masturbatory interest in small boats, that’s a price I’m willing to pay.
    Rory Stewart would make a pretty good Claus von Stauffenberg. Rory von Stauffenbert

    But he needs access to the XL Bully Lair

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claus_von_Stauffenberg
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    How can Rishi be PM in Feb 2025. Let's ignore the absolutely unlikely things - aliens, WWIII, nuclear conflagration, bubonic plague wiping out London etc.

    It reduces to one central factor: Either the Labour or Tory leader will be PM in Feb 2025. It isn't complicated. The Labour leader will be PM unless the Tories get approximately 314 seats. (314+8 DUP = 322. 321 is a majority if Speaker + 7 SFs don't count. 650-8=642).

    The Tories therefore cannot lose more than 51 seats. 365-51=314.

    In normal circumstances this is quite doable. But these times are not normal.

    It would take a lot of these:
    Iron discipline in the party.
    A united Tory front.
    No scandals.
    Reform to be marginalised.
    Some economic luck.
    A year of free gift populist policies to the centre right.
    Labour to divide between left and right.
    A united right wing press/media campaign.
    Labour scandals
    Sir K to be discredited, and probably replaced.

    And, hopefully, it still wouldn't succeed.

    8 DUP seems to be taken as read in these calculations...
    There's a significant chance it might be fewer.
    7 SF could be more or less, too.
    Of course, all numbers approximate. However I think it can be taken as certain no-one will keep the Tories in power except the DUP, and that SF won't take their seats.

    If you think the DUP would stay neutral, or even side with the centre left rainbow (Lab, LD, SNP, PC, Green, Alliance, SDLP) than of course the Tories margin is slimmer. Assuming 8 for SF + Speaker, they need 321/2 seats to form a government.

    The other thing to note is that the area of result which results in something uncertain and chaotic is fairly large. PB will explode with activity if this looks likely, as will the media generally.

    In that realm there are only a few certainties: The Tories have no friends except possibly the DUP, the world's most perfidious faction to whom the word 'friend' is a stranger. The government can only be led by Tories or Labour. So almost all NOM result will bring a Labour led government, even if a chaotic and brief one.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Inflation falls faster than expected despite wage growth staying strong, so voters feel better off. Sunak cuts taxes before the election and Labour is wrong-footed, with voters either thinking Starmer will put their taxes up or not really thinking Labour have any economic plan at all. Starmer falls flat in the debates, he looks old and grumpy, talking Britain down while Sunak's tigger-like tech bro optimism resonates. Sunak's promise to leave the ECHR to deal with a worsening small boats crisis is popular, and voters think Labour has no plan. The Tories successfully micro target constituencies with voters and spread hard to falsify scare messages about Labour's intentions. Some tight races are tilted the Tories' way by younger voters realising on the day they lack the right ID to vote. As the race tightens English voters worry about the SNP tail wagging the Labour dog. Labour panics and their message discipline breaks down, with the shadow cabinet briefing against Starmer. In the end the Tories hold onto 320 seats and Sunak does a deal with the DUP to stay in office.
    This kind of scenario isn't very likely but is far from impossible.

    Its about as likely as Sunak rolling 10x6 in a row. I mean, its possible....
    10x6 on dice is lottery-winning odds, 60.5m to 1

    I’ll start with tossing a coin 10 heads in a row, because that can actually happen.
    (There’s a video out there of Derren Brown doing it, took him something like nine hours of tossing a coin!).
    It's not nearly as likely as getting heads or tails right or wrong 10 times in the row. My recollection is that one of the test captains came very close to this this summer, albeit calling it wrong every time.
  • Are we the baddies?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,348
    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812

    Are we the baddies?

    With Suella on your side could you really doubt it? I mean....
  • DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Inflation falls faster than expected despite wage growth staying strong, so voters feel better off. Sunak cuts taxes before the election and Labour is wrong-footed, with voters either thinking Starmer will put their taxes up or not really thinking Labour have any economic plan at all. Starmer falls flat in the debates, he looks old and grumpy, talking Britain down while Sunak's tigger-like tech bro optimism resonates. Sunak's promise to leave the ECHR to deal with a worsening small boats crisis is popular, and voters think Labour has no plan. The Tories successfully micro target constituencies with voters and spread hard to falsify scare messages about Labour's intentions. Some tight races are tilted the Tories' way by younger voters realising on the day they lack the right ID to vote. As the race tightens English voters worry about the SNP tail wagging the Labour dog. Labour panics and their message discipline breaks down, with the shadow cabinet briefing against Starmer. In the end the Tories hold onto 320 seats and Sunak does a deal with the DUP to stay in office.
    This kind of scenario isn't very likely but is far from impossible.

    Its about as likely as Sunak rolling 10x6 in a row. I mean, its possible....
    10x6 on dice is lottery-winning odds, 60.5m to 1

    I’ll start with tossing a coin 10 heads in a row, because that can actually happen.
    (There’s a video out there of Derren Brown doing it, took him something like nine hours of tossing a coin!).
    It's not nearly as likely as getting heads or tails right or wrong 10 times in the row. My recollection is that one of the test captains came very close to this this summer, albeit calling it wrong every time.
    Manchester United have had 11 consecutive home draws in cup competitions.

    Bloody ball ache when the direct debit keeps going out every time it happens.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,348
    algarkirk said:

    dixiedean said:

    algarkirk said:

    How can Rishi be PM in Feb 2025. Let's ignore the absolutely unlikely things - aliens, WWIII, nuclear conflagration, bubonic plague wiping out London etc.

    It reduces to one central factor: Either the Labour or Tory leader will be PM in Feb 2025. It isn't complicated. The Labour leader will be PM unless the Tories get approximately 314 seats. (314+8 DUP = 322. 321 is a majority if Speaker + 7 SFs don't count. 650-8=642).

    The Tories therefore cannot lose more than 51 seats. 365-51=314.

    In normal circumstances this is quite doable. But these times are not normal.

    It would take a lot of these:
    Iron discipline in the party.
    A united Tory front.
    No scandals.
    Reform to be marginalised.
    Some economic luck.
    A year of free gift populist policies to the centre right.
    Labour to divide between left and right.
    A united right wing press/media campaign.
    Labour scandals
    Sir K to be discredited, and probably replaced.

    And, hopefully, it still wouldn't succeed.

    8 DUP seems to be taken as read in these calculations...
    There's a significant chance it might be fewer.
    7 SF could be more or less, too.
    Of course, all numbers approximate. However I think it can be taken as certain no-one will keep the Tories in power except the DUP, and that SF won't take their seats.

    If you think the DUP would stay neutral, or even side with the centre left rainbow (Lab, LD, SNP, PC, Green, Alliance, SDLP) than of course the Tories margin is slimmer. Assuming 8 for SF + Speaker, they need 321/2 seats to form a government.

    The other thing to note is that the area of result which results in something uncertain and chaotic is fairly large. PB will explode with activity if this looks likely, as will the media generally.

    In that realm there are only a few certainties: The Tories have no friends except possibly the DUP, the world's most perfidious faction to whom the word 'friend' is a stranger. The government can only be led by Tories or Labour. So almost all NOM result will bring a Labour led government, even if a chaotic and brief one.

    I expect SDLP will vanish at the next election, losing Foyle to Sinn Fein, and South Belfast to Alliance. The latest poll from Lucid Talk puts them at 6%.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    dixiedean said:

    What's with the Britain's exit from the EU question?
    May as well ask which leader is better to deal with Suez.

    I don't think this is complicated. Just as our membership of the EU was politically live from accession to the moment of departure, so our non-membership of the bloc which (taken with EEA/EFTA) unites each and every one of our neighbours for about 1,000 miles will be politically live for the foreseeable future too.
  • Osiris REx is due to drop off a bit of Bennu within the hour.
  • DavidL said:

    Are we the baddies?

    With Suella on your side could you really doubt it? I mean....
    I just thought she was saving us from the tofu-eating wokerati.....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    edited September 2023
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Inflation falls faster than expected despite wage growth staying strong, so voters feel better off. Sunak cuts taxes before the election and Labour is wrong-footed, with voters either thinking Starmer will put their taxes up or not really thinking Labour have any economic plan at all. Starmer falls flat in the debates, he looks old and grumpy, talking Britain down while Sunak's tigger-like tech bro optimism resonates. Sunak's promise to leave the ECHR to deal with a worsening small boats crisis is popular, and voters think Labour has no plan. The Tories successfully micro target constituencies with voters and spread hard to falsify scare messages about Labour's intentions. Some tight races are tilted the Tories' way by younger voters realising on the day they lack the right ID to vote. As the race tightens English voters worry about the SNP tail wagging the Labour dog. Labour panics and their message discipline breaks down, with the shadow cabinet briefing against Starmer. In the end the Tories hold onto 320 seats and Sunak does a deal with the DUP to stay in office.
    This kind of scenario isn't very likely but is far from impossible.

    Its about as likely as Sunak rolling 10x6 in a row. I mean, its possible....
    10x6 on dice is lottery-winning odds, 60.5m to 1

    I’ll start with tossing a coin 10 heads in a row, because that can actually happen.
    (There’s a video out there of Derren Brown doing it, took him something like nine hours of tossing a coin!).
    It's not nearly as likely as getting heads or tails right or wrong 10 times in the row. My recollection is that one of the test captains came very close to this this summer, albeit calling it wrong every time.
    Calling the toss right or wrong 10 times, is exactly the same odds as aiming for 10 heads, as the events are independent. 1 in 1024. 10 heads just looks way better on camera.

    Yes, Australia called the toss wrong four times in a row, only getting it right on the 5th Test. The odds of that are one in 16 for the four losses.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    edited September 2023
    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Yes, I think Starmer will get a pretty good majority, but then his polling will go into steep decline very quickly (after a few months of thank-God-the-Tories-are-gone honeymoon) when it is revealed that he has zero new ideas for dealing with migration, the debt, public services, and no money to throw at problems. Moreover a lot of his stuff will be seriously unpopular in itself - Woke issues, trans stuff, all that- his activists and MPs will ensure he ends up at the wrong end of debates. And he is fervently Remoaner and this will become a thorny issue

    I can see Labour plunging to great depths of polling negativity within 1-2 years of their election, and the Tories might easily be back in power by 2029, so their despair is rather overdone
  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,457
    DavidL said:

    Gordon Brown was a truly chronic PM who was unlucky enough to inherit the fag end of a long period of government by his party. He just about held on because he persuaded a significant number of people that he had "saved the world" and that only he could be trusted to manage the economy in such difficult times. It didn't quite work for him but an international crisis playing to Sunak's area of strength, finances, just might make people pause, if they can be persuaded to forget the Truss fiasco, maybe.

    It's a real stretch. I think the tweeters are probably right that it would need SKS disappearing from the scene and a much less attractive option being offered by Labour. Sunak's biggest single problem, even above having a cabinet that makes the muppet ensemble look good, is that people are just not scared of SKS. They can avoid being bored to death by simply not listening to him. The majority of the population are ok with that.

    Whilst I agree that Brown wasn't a great PM, I think he did at least give the impression that he actually wanted to do the job. Sure, he was lucky in that the financial crisis played to his strengths - but he genuinely did seem to enjoy dealing with it.

    He even had a bit of a glow-up in terms of his personal appearance: he clearly had media training, started wearing much better suits, and stopped doing whatever-it-was that used to make his hair look unwashed. He actually ended his premiership looking better than he did when he started, which is rare for a PM.

    Sunak's the opposite - he gives the impression that he's simply not comfortable in the job. He often shows clear signs of exasperation, and he whines about people "playing politics". It's hard not feel that this may be the first time in his life when things haven't gone his way, and I suspect he hates it.

    And, in contrast to Brown, he's beginning to look increasingly tired. He's greying at the temples, and growing his hair longer so that he can comb it over the rapidly-spreading bald patch. He's riding the tail end of a fashion wave with those ankle-grazing trousers - it's beginning to look a little desperate, and it's starting to attract comment. He needs to have a good holiday... but hasn't he just had one?

    If there were to be a 2008-style crisis now, would Sunak really be able to deal with it? I'm honestly not sure. I think he might be worse than Brown.
  • Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Why, do you think that Hunt is going to reverse Sunak's fiscal drag policy?

    Currently nominal wages are growing faster than inflation, but real take-home wages are still falling due to fiscal drag.

    No feel good factor if any wage growth is being taken in fiscal drag and not taken home.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    Surely a pen.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    That's a penalty
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    I am going out to the workshop to pull an engine now. I will Photoshop a Rotzbremse on to RS later when I have time.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Right decision
  • If there was a major defence crisis, do we really think folks would rally around Rishi “not sure which country my wife is domiciled in” Sunak?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,145
    edited September 2023
    MattW said:

    Last one before going in the garden.

    I think the one interesting decision that Rishi Sunak has made is the increase in heat pump grant to £7500, which means that for quite a lot of normal sized houses that would now cover the whole cost.

    He has not been clear about the numbers of grants available, however.

    I see that Octopussy have now reduced their minimum quote for a heat pump, any radiator changes, suitable water cylinder and the plumbing bits and pieces, including installation, to £500. The "90% of quotes below" number is £5565.

    They quote from data supplied, and the EPC. So make sure it is up to date !
    https://octopus.energy/get-a-heat-pump/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    Leon said:

    Right decision

    Yep, as the law currently stands a hand in a raised position away from the body to any degree blocking a shot on goal equals a penalty. Not really understanding what Gary is on about.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    Right decision

    Yep, as the law currently stands a hand in a raised position away from the body to any degree blocking a shot on goal equals a penalty. Not really understanding what Gary is on about.
    Me neither. Just some instinctive empathy for the defender

    If that's not a penalty for handball then what is?!

    But here we go. 2-2. Exciting!
  • Leon said:

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    fpt for @TimS, coz this is important



    Yes, the Tories are a bit like Germany in the 20th century. Losing the Great War in 1918, the way they did - a slightly frustrating armistice, with no actual occupation of German land, and just a few hungry people in Berlin - was not enough. The Germans went away simultaneously humiliated, and with the sense they *could* have won it, and weren't really defeated

    So they came back for more in 1939, in an even less pleasant guise, and then they had to be utterly annihilated, no question, and Berlin had to be levelled, millions raped, the country divided, and so forth

    The Tories under Theresa May were the Kaiser's Germany - then Boris was a kind of burlesque Weimar interlude, when you thought they might be fun, then Truss was the hyperinflation, and now they are the Nazis, and Sunak is Hitler, who must be entirely vanquished

    I hope this helps younger PB-ers

    Sunak is Hitler.

    Jesus. I think everyone on this site collectively needs a nice cup of tea and a sit down.
    No, I think for once Leon may be on to something.

    David Cameron was Bismarck, Theresa May was Kaiser Bill, Boris Johnson was the Weimar Republic, Sunak is Hitler, Jacob Rees-Mogg is Goebbels and Suella Braun is Eva Braverman. It all makes perfect sense.
    So all the Conservatives need to do is be divided among four of their opponents for a bit (Labour, Lib Dems, Greens and Reform?) while they totally rebase things, before a miracle recovery in a decade or so?
    Yes, but first we need to bomb Conservative Party HQ into oblivion.

    There will likely be civilian casualties, but since the civilians in questions will be a bunch of hooray henries with a masturbatory interest in small boats, that’s a price I’m willing to pay.
    Rory Stewart would make a pretty good Claus von Stauffenberg. Rory von Stauffenbert

    But he needs access to the XL Bully Lair

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claus_von_Stauffenberg
    If we're going down this line, is Sunak not more of a Dönitz, the little guy left holding the poonami at the end? Far from on innocent, natch...

    Then we can line up Stewart's futile attempt of 2019 with von Stauffenberg's of 1944.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    What a player Son is. And Maddison. Great goal.
  • If there was a major defence crisis, do we really think folks would rally around Rishi “not sure which country my wife is domiciled in” Sunak?

    If he was replacing Harry Maguire, then probably, yes, for a couple of games at least.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    DavidL said:

    What a player Son is. And Maddison. Great goal.

    I haven't watched a game at the Emirates for ages. Don't people constantly complain about the lack of atmos?

    I know it's the Norf Lunnun derby but still, it's pretty intense
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,348

    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Why, do you think that Hunt is going to reverse Sunak's fiscal drag policy?

    Currently nominal wages are growing faster than inflation, but real take-home wages are still falling due to fiscal drag.

    No feel good factor if any wage growth is being taken in fiscal drag and not taken home.
    Inflation at 4% by the end of this year, likely dropping further, with wages growing at 7-8% will outweigh fiscal drag.

    Say, you're on £30,000. Your wages go up by £2,500 in nominal terms. £500 of that goes in extra tax, at 20%, and £1,200 in terms of extra inflation.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,348
    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Yes, I think Starmer will get a pretty good majority, but then his polling will go into steep decline very quickly (after a few months of thank-God-the-Tories-are-gone honeymoon) when it is revealed that he has zero new ideas for dealing with migration, the debt, public services, and no money to throw at problems. Moreover a lot of his stuff will be seriously unpopular in itself - Woke issues, trans stuff, all that- his activists and MPs will ensure he ends up at the wrong end of debates. And he is fervently Remoaner and this will become a thorny issue

    I can see Labour plunging to great depths of polling negativity within 1-2 years of their election, and the Tories might easily be back in power by 2029, so their despair is rather overdone
    The 2027 round of local elections is going to be astonishingly good for the Conservatives, on a par with years like 1976/77.
  • Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Why, do you think that Hunt is going to reverse Sunak's fiscal drag policy?

    Currently nominal wages are growing faster than inflation, but real take-home wages are still falling due to fiscal drag.

    No feel good factor if any wage growth is being taken in fiscal drag and not taken home.
    The starting rate for tax will have to go up as the state pension will be going over it, and it would add loads of pensioners onto self assessment, who won't know how to fill it or even that they have to.
  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,457
    edited September 2023
    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    What a player Son is. And Maddison. Great goal.

    I haven't watched a game at the Emirates for ages. Don't people constantly complain about the lack of atmos?

    I know it's the Norf Lunnun derby but still, it's pretty intense
    I'm about a mile to the north-east and the noise coming over is quite astonishing...
  • What a goal by Nunez! What a player.

    This is an exciting game, 2-1. :)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,632
    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Yes, I think Starmer will get a pretty good majority, but then his polling will go into steep decline very quickly (after a few months of thank-God-the-Tories-are-gone honeymoon) when it is revealed that he has zero new ideas for dealing with migration, the debt, public services, and no money to throw at problems. Moreover a lot of his stuff will be seriously unpopular in itself - Woke issues, trans stuff, all that- his activists and MPs will ensure he ends up at the wrong end of debates. And he is fervently Remoaner and this will become a thorny issue

    I can see Labour plunging to great depths of polling negativity within 1-2 years of their election, and the Tories might easily be back in power by 2029, so their despair is rather overdone
    Nah, there is no chance of the Tories appointing a competent leader in 2025, and in any case electorates have only produced a single Parliament government once since the war.

    I am no Starmerite, but there is a seachange in opinion that will see the Tories gone for a decade or longer.

    As to the header, it brings this meme to mind:


  • Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Why, do you think that Hunt is going to reverse Sunak's fiscal drag policy?

    Currently nominal wages are growing faster than inflation, but real take-home wages are still falling due to fiscal drag.

    No feel good factor if any wage growth is being taken in fiscal drag and not taken home.
    Inflation at 4% by the end of this year, likely dropping further, with wages growing at 7-8% will outweigh fiscal drag.

    Say, you're on £30,000. Your wages go up by £2,500 in nominal terms. £500 of that goes in extra tax, at 20%, and £1,200 in terms of extra inflation.
    Since when was tax at £30k only 20%? Haven't you forgotten a few things, like NIC, if applicable the graduate tax etc?

    Yes if inflation falls to 4% then maybe we might have real wage growth, but we don't yet. And miniscule real wage growth in the next year thanks to fiscal drag eating up what should be wage growth won't counteract the real wage decline of the past few years.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    edited September 2023
    AlsoLei said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    What a player Son is. And Maddison. Great goal.

    I haven't watched a game at the Emirates for ages. Don't people constantly complain about the lack of atmos?

    I know it's the Norf Lunnun derby but still, it's pretty intense
    I'm about a mile to the north-east and the noise coming over is quite astonishing...
    Pubs here in Camden also very noisy

    The EPL is clearly successful for several reasons, but the fans are obviously a big part of it. Contrast that with the 976 people in the Saudi league who recently watched Jordan Henderson

    https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/jordan-henderson-saudi-league-fans-31004291

    The Saudi league is gonna fail for this reason, I predict - or at least not prosper. Not enough fans, zero atmos, no young player will want to go to a graveyard league (for more than a season or two making ££££)
  • Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Why, do you think that Hunt is going to reverse Sunak's fiscal drag policy?

    Currently nominal wages are growing faster than inflation, but real take-home wages are still falling due to fiscal drag.

    No feel good factor if any wage growth is being taken in fiscal drag and not taken home.
    Inflation at 4% by the end of this year, likely dropping further, with wages growing at 7-8% will outweigh fiscal drag.

    Say, you're on £30,000. Your wages go up by £2,500 in nominal terms. £500 of that goes in extra tax, at 20%, and £1,200 in terms of extra inflation.
    Since when was tax at £30k only 20%? Haven't you forgotten a few things, like NIC, if applicable the graduate tax etc?

    Yes if inflation falls to 4% then maybe we might have real wage growth, but we don't yet. And miniscule real wage growth in the next year thanks to fiscal drag eating up what should be wage growth won't counteract the real wage decline of the past few years.
    Inflation is different in different households too. A renter with a family to feed is probably double the headline rate. A retired home owner half the headline rate.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249

    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Why, do you think that Hunt is going to reverse Sunak's fiscal drag policy?

    Currently nominal wages are growing faster than inflation, but real take-home wages are still falling due to fiscal drag.

    No feel good factor if any wage growth is being taken in fiscal drag and not taken home.
    The starting rate for tax will have to go up as the state pension will be going over it, and it would add loads of pensioners onto self assessment, who won't know how to fill it or even that they have to.
    The personal allowance is is £12,570

    The state pension is £9,627.80

    I would argue that they should be the same, for tidiness. But that’s part of my UBI proposal.
  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,457
    DavidL said:

    AlsoLei said:

    DavidL said:

    Gordon Brown was a truly chronic PM who was unlucky enough to inherit the fag end of a long period of government by his party. He just about held on because he persuaded a significant number of people that he had "saved the world" and that only he could be trusted to manage the economy in such difficult times. It didn't quite work for him but an international crisis playing to Sunak's area of strength, finances, just might make people pause, if they can be persuaded to forget the Truss fiasco, maybe.

    It's a real stretch. I think the tweeters are probably right that it would need SKS disappearing from the scene and a much less attractive option being offered by Labour. Sunak's biggest single problem, even above having a cabinet that makes the muppet ensemble look good, is that people are just not scared of SKS. They can avoid being bored to death by simply not listening to him. The majority of the population are ok with that.

    Whilst I agree that Brown wasn't a great PM, I think he did at least give the impression that he actually wanted to do the job. Sure, he was lucky in that the financial crisis played to his strengths - but he genuinely did seem to enjoy dealing with it.

    He even had a bit of a glow-up in terms of his personal appearance: he clearly had media training, started wearing much better suits, and stopped doing whatever-it-was that used to make his hair look unwashed. He actually ended his premiership looking better than he did when he started, which is rare for a PM.

    Sunak's the opposite - he gives the impression that he's simply not comfortable in the job. He often shows clear signs of exasperation, and he whines about people "playing politics". It's hard not feel that this may be the first time in his life when things haven't gone his way, and I suspect he hates it.

    And, in contrast to Brown, he's beginning to look increasingly tired. He's greying at the temples, and growing his hair longer so that he can comb it over the rapidly-spreading bald patch. He's riding the tail end of a fashion wave with those ankle-grazing trousers - it's beginning to look a little desperate, and it's starting to attract comment. He needs to have a good holiday... but hasn't he just had one?

    If there were to be a 2008-style crisis now, would Sunak really be able to deal with it? I'm honestly not sure. I think he might be worse than Brown.
    Your memory of Gordon Brown is different from mine. I saw someone who had wanted the job forever and then didn't really know what to do with it when he got it. His indecision brought his government grinding to a halt until Mandelson came and sorted things out a bit. The dishonesty of refusing to have a spending review when massive cuts (on the back of a collapse of finance based tax revenues) were so obviously necessary was a gross dereliction of duty.

    Sunak, I agree, gives the impression he found it a lot easier to make decisions and have them put into effect at Goldman Sachs than he does now. He comes across as exasperated by the messy nonsense of democracy.
    That's a good point about Mandelson steadying the ship towards the end. Is there a similar figure who could do the same for Sunak?
  • Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Why, do you think that Hunt is going to reverse Sunak's fiscal drag policy?

    Currently nominal wages are growing faster than inflation, but real take-home wages are still falling due to fiscal drag.

    No feel good factor if any wage growth is being taken in fiscal drag and not taken home.
    Inflation at 4% by the end of this year, likely dropping further, with wages growing at 7-8% will outweigh fiscal drag.

    Say, you're on £30,000. Your wages go up by £2,500 in nominal terms. £500 of that goes in extra tax, at 20%, and £1,200 in terms of extra inflation.
    Since when was tax at £30k only 20%? Haven't you forgotten a few things, like NIC, if applicable the graduate tax etc?

    Yes if inflation falls to 4% then maybe we might have real wage growth, but we don't yet. And miniscule real wage growth in the next year thanks to fiscal drag eating up what should be wage growth won't counteract the real wage decline of the past few years.
    Inflation is different in different households too. A renter with a family to feed is probably double the headline rate. A retired home owner half the headline rate.
    Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

    The renter can have double the marginal tax rate of the home owner too, even if they earn the same amount.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,145
    edited September 2023

    Sean_F said:

    My best guess is that real wages will grow fairly strongly between now and the next election. That will enable the Conservatives to close the gap on economic issues, with Labour.

    But, Labour will remain well ahead, on public services, which, combined with the general exasperation with the government, still gives them a pretty big lead on polling day.

    Labour's own poor ratings probably point to quite a drop off in support, after winning the next election.

    For the Conservatives to actually win a majority, or near-majority, would require the blackest of black swans.

    Why, do you think that Hunt is going to reverse Sunak's fiscal drag policy?

    Currently nominal wages are growing faster than inflation, but real take-home wages are still falling due to fiscal drag.

    No feel good factor if any wage growth is being taken in fiscal drag and not taken home.
    The starting rate for tax will have to go up as the state pension will be going over it, and it would add loads of pensioners onto self assessment, who won't know how to fill it or even that they have to.
    Current Full State Pension: £10600 per annum.
    Current Starting Rate of Tax: £12,500.

    That's quite a bit of headroom. But it could be an issue if inflation does not fall to target range within 1-2 years.

    I make it average increase of just over 4% would stop it hitting £12500 by 2027-28.
This discussion has been closed.