Categories
Ex-PBer Pedley now Ipsos pollster makes strong point here – politicalbetting.com
Ex-PBer Pedley now Ipsos pollster makes strong point here – politicalbetting.com
For me the value of MRP will be if / when polls narrow. You don't need it right now to explain this leads to a massive Labour landslide. The more pertinent question is will there be a ~15 pt national swing (the biggest post war national swing ever)! Sceptical but lets see. pic.twitter.com/O7xXfOLyZa
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
For me it means an overall majority of 75 or higher.
1: Parents/pupils want a choice to go to good schools, not just be dumped in the closest school they can happen to walk to. If driving past a school you don't like allows you to help your kids education, that's a price well worth paying in my eyes.
2: People are more wary of letting kids be unsupervised in public nowadays, whether justified or not, because of too many stories of people harming kids etc. I wouldn't let my kids walk to or play in the park next to our estate unsupervised which doesn't even involved crossing any roads, let alone much further, to school.
And probably most importantly 3: Both parents in most families nowadays work so can't simply walk to a school and back home, they need to drop the kids off at school then continue their drive to get to their place of work. Dropping kids off at 8:45am and being at work for 9am is easier with a car.
'Back in the day' when mum walked the kids to school is easier if mum didn't have to go to work.
Russia also has the advantage that they are not just willing to, but trying to, destroy the territory of Ukraine through laying millions of mines. Mines can hold ground, they don't help an advance.
One of the other learnings is that tanks are incredibly vulnerable to new drone based weapons. I don't think anyone, yet, has figured out how to address this.
Nigel_Foremain said:
» show previous quotes
PB's resident Mr Thicky-No-Brains is talking complete bollox as ever. Sad thing is the dribbling old fool actually believes the crap he spouts, but sadly for him and his hate-mongering divisive loser nationalists, he is wrong.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/651563/uk-public-spending-per-capita-by-country/
I see our resident scumbag has not expired yet. What a pity. GFY.
Still wrong, tho... 😀
Have you seen the vast amount of military equipment that Poland has been buying? Poland is no longer a poor nation and realises that it cannot rely on almost anyone else to defend itself. It has vivid memories of being torn asunder by the joint efforts of Nazi Germany and Stalin's USSR.
Poland, and it has to be said Romania too, are doing everything they possibly can to help Ukraine as at the very least it gives them time to arm themselves to defend against an aggressive Russia.
The problem we have is that the Russian population has had 20 years of indoctrination by Putin and that most of them believe that they ought to reconquer these countries. How can you defeat that?
Let that sink in.
Things ain't exactly rosy in Moscow.
Also that ground attack helicopters are, in this world of SAMs and shoulder-mounted weaponry, useless. Their role in this war has been more like mobile artillery, with rapid deployment and ballistic launching miles behind the lines.
The growth of marine drones is brilliant.
My favourite stat from this war (courtesy of The Chieftain) is that on any given day there will be approx 10,000 drones in theatre.
No stop signs, speed limits. Nobody's gonna slow me down...we're on a highway to hell.
It doesn’t mean Russia is gonna take all of Ukraine. It does mean it might be really hard for Ukraine to dislodge Russia from what they occupy now
The Tories lose control of events is they lose 40+ seats. Labour need 123 for a majority. The boggy middle ground is huge. I think there is a 60+% we will be in that area.
Keeping the maths ridiculously simple, if Labour gain 45 seats form the Tories and no other change, the Tories lose control of events (320 seats) but Labour have only 247 seats. This would be fascinating, and some such picture is not impossible.
Anyhoo... The Fundamental British Values (introduced under the coalition) are democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs.
I wonder which one Rishi wants to pin speed limits onto?
They used a drone to take out a valuable Russian radar station in Kursk yesterday. Ukrainian drone capabilities have come a long way from the TB2s that made such a splash early in the war.
Edit: As an aside, it's clear that the rapid development of drones is on a par with other periods of rapid military development in the past, such as jet fighters, or tanks.
A country whose military is trapped in 15-year military procurement projects is not well-placed to keep up with such developments.
Others should continously be built linking new and existing towns, rather than forcing people to take diversions onto pre-existing routes.
Eg a few other possible routes.
Could do a North/South route from Oxford (and maybe further South), East of Birmingham, Burton, Uttoxeter, east of Stoke, Macclesfield, Rochdale and Burnley.
Another good one could be a motorway or even an A-road (with a bridge across the Ribble) to the west of Preston across the Ribble uptowards Blackpool, rather than diverting all traffic through Preston or onto the M6. There's a lot of land in that region around Skelmersdale and Stockport that could be developed with some new towns with that infrastructure too.
Others might have their own suggestions - and that's just trying to stick to the North West, without looking at other options like Cambridge to Oxford etc.
It may not be compulsory, but its pretty damned close.
Biggest party 370 Second biggest party 270
Biggest party 360 with the three next biggest parties all on 90 each
Perhaps technically it is the former but I would say the latter in effect.
- Overestimated Russian military strategy and tactics
- Overestimated Russian technological strength (the hypersonic missiles being one example)
- Underestimated Russian resilience to sanctions
- Overestimated the seriousness of Russia's nuclear threats
- Underestimated Russian morale and tenacity in the face of major personnel losses
- Underestimated Ukrainian ingenuity, military strategy and willpower
- Overestimated Russia's leverage over energy supply in Europe
- Underestimated Ukrainian personnel losses (though not equipment losses, which are quite closely monitored by OSINTers)
We'll continue to both over- and under-estimate all sorts of things as this war progresses.
Trouble is, of course, that Labour will have to rely on a rainbow coalition of support.
TheScreamingEagles said:
Andy_JS said:
Apart from Lab on 39%, does anyone have the shares for the other parties from the Times MRP?
Con 26.3%
Lib Dems 10.8%
Con identical, LD and Labour higher than the supposed MRP numbers fpt.
One income is very sustainable if you don't have to pay for housing.
When effectively almost an entire take home salary can be consumed by rent alone, let alone trying to save for a deposit, then 2 becomes rather necessary.
Unless you want people to live off welfare instead.
- Small majority: 0-30 seats
- Working majority: 30-60 seats
- Large majority: 60 seats plus
- Landslide: 2-factor test:
1. majority of 80 seats or more, and
2. change in seat numbers on election night of 100 or more
I do think the imagery of the ground moving is important in landslides so I agree 2001 and 1987 didn't really fit the bill.
I think that's a much more likely scenario than a repeat of the Korean ceasefire. Ukraine's indigenous capabilities are rapidly improving, F-16s are coming, Russia's stocks of Cold War equipment continue to be depleted.
The potential difference is China. If China starts providing artillery, armoured vehicles and other supplies to Russia then the situation becomes much more difficult.
And even if its median, then 50% take home less than that. Plus of course parents skew to younger adults who earn less and have to rent, while high pay skews to older adults.
China views Russia as a rival not an ally.
Russia occupies historic Chinese territory they're still interested in and also China wants to be the large and in charge power in Asia, not their noisy northern neighbours.
And is £1500 per month really minimum wage now? It doesn't seem so very long ago that that's what I was earning after tax.
source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/obituaries/2023/09/29/dianne-feinstein-california-senator-dead/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dianne_Feinstein
Governor Newsom will name a replacement. (More than one person wants the job.)
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
Plus, the SNP aren’t going away.
If they had a free choice between a victorious Ukraine providing a morale boost to democracies, or a stronger Russia keeping democracies distracted and disheartened, then they'd go for a stronger Russia.
The diplomacy that is going on to deter China from becoming involved on Russia's side is vitally important, and it's also an important element of sanctions on Russia. These have to be made as effective as possible as a warning to China.
https://www.thesalarycalculator.co.uk/hourly.php
The Tories lose control, though not all hope, if they lose 41 seats - making them 324. They almost certainly lose all hope if they lose 51 seats, making them 314.
They can lose this number by losing 20 to the LDs and 31 to Labour. Labour then have 233 seats, Tories have 314 and SFAICS Labour would lead the (extremely rainbow) government.
This starkly contrasts with the 123 seats Labour need for an absolute majority.
All my figures can be out by one or two, but the principle remains. I suggest that this element will make the 2024 election particularly fascinating as the polls tighten.
If Sir Keir Starmer is smart he could gain a march on Sunak and be MORE pro motorist than Sunak.
Driving is more important for hard stretched working families and swing voters who can't chill at home then go out for the day on a bus pass.
Starmer could point to Sunak and the Tories neglect of investment in our roads and pledge to do more, invest more.
You also misunderstood earlier about my long post about the pro-motorist policy. I wasn't arguing the points, just laying out the various uncertainties over why it may or may not be successful for picking up more votes.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
If not that, then something like abolishing VAT and green levies on fuel.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.