Don't get this "they don't count postal votes first" business. Haven't they already had the signatures verified? Since they are there at 10 pm, and no other votes are, then why wouldn't they be counted first? Or am I missing something?
Don't they have to be mixed in with the ordinary votes?
Knocking them out. If you are busy knocking them up then not only are they not voting, you’re also not knocking on other doors.
Unless you’re saying there were a lot of babies born with flamboyant shoes after your efforts.…
At some point during Election Day, usually dependent on the availability of volunteers, the committee room organiser will send people out to ‘Knock-Up’ your supporters who have not yet voted. It is usual practice to leave this until at least lunchtime as most people who don’t vote early tend to vote after work. If you know your area as you should you will know who is likely to be in and who is not. The simplest method of doing this is to equip the volunteers with a version of the Out Card which has a message on it reminding voters that this is Polling Day. These can be popped through letterboxes and can remind anyone who goes straight home after work that they really should visit the polling station. Just because it is your most important day does not mean it is theirs and some people do genuinely forget.
Don’t expect people to drop everything and run to the polls. Even in households where one partner is at home all day, a significant number will wait until the other partner returns from work before voting, which they most likely will do together. If someone tells you they will vote at 6 pm make a note that getas passed on each time that road is knocked-up and do NOT visit that person again until after 6pm.
UK elections usually occur on Thursdays, which for most of is a working day. In most areas there is a rush to the polls in the early morning and early evening so the evening knock-ups are vital. If you are short of volunteers and they can only help for a part of the day ask them if they help in the evening.
Keep your Knock-Up sheets as up to date as possible so that you send your knockers-up to the area with the largest number of supporters who have not yet voted but at the same time try to ensure that every area is visited during the course of the day.
Hearing Labour's ahead on postal votes in Tamworth. Today's weather means that could be significant
Labour's Mid Beds campaign also apparently v positive about their chance of snatching a win... however, a Lib Dem source says they have been working smaller villages hard
Don't get this "they don't count postal votes first" business. Haven't they already had the signatures verified? Since they are there at 10 pm, and no other votes are, then why wouldn't they be counted first? Or am I missing something?
I've seen it done first (or at least very early), but also seen it done part way through. I've no idea why, so I assume there's nothing to guide them on that front.
But if they do count first, I really don't think they'd be able to tell sufficiently within 5 minutes of the poll closing how good it was looking unless it was monstrously one sided.
Last time I went to bed at a by-election the Tories surprised by holding Uxbridge. But I'm older, fatter and more tired than I used to be so I'll still go to bed, but only when the seer of Uxbridge, HYUFD, commits to whether the Tories have indeed held either seat.
I stayed up for Rutherglen one as I was working but as you get older you wake up in the middle of the night to pee so normally have an alert on my phone telling me the result.
I'm not sure why you need an alert on your phone to tell you the result of your pee. It should be self-evident.
Indeed, and pushed the Leave price out to 14 at 10.20pm.
Always said he was a good chap, helped quite a few of us out there.
IIRC he started to spin the need for a second referendum?
Those were the days. 2015, Trump, and Brexit all generated 10/1 profits at near zero risk due to analysis on this site (yes I’ve donated to running costs, when asked, to reflect that).
I remember the EU referendum evening, when it was absolutely obvious that Leave had won, and yet being able to keep putting money on at odds of evens or better. It was absolute madness; the freest of free money.
My only regret was my inherent caution stopping me sticking on all available liquid cash. It was free money. But one day that caution will save my shirt.
Spare a thought for me, who, having drunk several whiskies in despair, piled in on what I thought was Leave knowing it was free money, only to realise I’d actually backed Remain - and had to spend an agonising 20 minutes trying to lay it off.
Not my finest hour.
Ouch. I’m guessing the rest bottle of the bottle then went down the hatch?
Don't get this "they don't count postal votes first" business. Haven't they already had the signatures verified? Since they are there at 10 pm, and no other votes are, then why wouldn't they be counted first? Or am I missing something?
Don't they have to be mixed in with the ordinary votes?
I dunno. Maybe that's what I'm missing. But, then, why do we hear Party X won the postals but lost on the day? Was especially prevalent belief in 2017 GE.
Hearing Labour's ahead on postal votes in Tamworth. Today's weather means that could be significant
Labour's Mid Beds campaign also apparently v positive about their chance of snatching a win... however, a Lib Dem source says they have been working smaller villages hard
Indeed, and pushed the Leave price out to 14 at 10.20pm.
Always said he was a good chap, helped quite a few of us out there.
IIRC he started to spin the need for a second referendum?
Those were the days. 2015, Trump, and Brexit all generated 10/1 profits at near zero risk due to analysis on this site (yes I’ve donated to running costs, when asked, to reflect that).
I remember the EU referendum evening, when it was absolutely obvious that Leave had won, and yet being able to keep putting money on at odds of evens or better. It was absolute madness; the freest of free money.
--Jim Jordan can't get to 217 --Prospects for a resolution to empower interim speaker McHenry look grim --Members getting death threats over their speaker votes --Lawmakers swearing & yelling at each other in closed-door meeting
However mental it was, I can at least understand why some people voted Tory in Uxbridge to stop Grant Shapps’s ULEZ. But what is the mentality as to why they would vote Tory in Dorries or Pincher land?
Whatever happened about ULEZ? Has anybody starved to death because they had to pay 12 quid or whatever to drive their shitbox to Croydon?
Nah, the cameras and TFL branded vehicles keep getting vandalised round my way. Also noticed an uptick in classic cars on the road.
Indeed, and pushed the Leave price out to 14 at 10.20pm.
Always said he was a good chap, helped quite a few of us out there.
IIRC he started to spin the need for a second referendum?
Those were the days. 2015, Trump, and Brexit all generated 10/1 profits at near zero risk due to analysis on this site (yes I’ve donated to running costs, when asked, to reflect that).
I remember the EU referendum evening, when it was absolutely obvious that Leave had won, and yet being able to keep putting money on at odds of evens or better. It was absolute madness; the freest of free money.
Still my most profitable ever betting night....
I can't remember if that - or Trump - was my most profitable. In both cases, the market was incredibly slow to respond to new information.
Don't get this "they don't count postal votes first" business. Haven't they already had the signatures verified? Since they are there at 10 pm, and no other votes are, then why wouldn't they be counted first? Or am I missing something?
Don't they have to be mixed in with the ordinary votes?
As I recall verified votes go into sets of larger boxes (separate from the polling place boxes they arrived in - which are a mixture of stuffed to the brim and near empty depending on the area), ready for the actual counting.
But you usually can tell the postal votes when they arrive on your table of course because they are much more neatly paper clipped together than the rush job done on the night, and without the mixture of multiple or unconventional fold lines.
For votes larger than a council ward it can be a nightmare if the overall tally is not matching the verified number, everyone has to stay around and hunt for whereever someone accidentally put a bundle of 11 sets of 10 together, or 9 votes in a paperclip instead of 10. Had that happen a Euro election, it was very frustrating.
NYAG rolls tape on Eric Trump's deposition distancing himself from the appraisals of the property:
"I pour concrete. I operate properties. I don’t focus on appraisals between a law firm and Cushman. This is just not what I do in my day-to-day responsibilities. And you know, I hardly recognize the names on here."...
I was trying to refresh my memory of counting guidance (even after doing it at a dozen different elections or more it's easy to get hazy), and I don't recall this bit from some 2017 EC guidance at all. Wonder if it still applies. At a UK Parliamentary election, the (A)RO must take reasonable steps to begin counting the votes within four hours of the close of poll at 10pm.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
--Jim Jordan can't get to 217 --Prospects for a resolution to empower interim speaker McHenry look grim --Members getting death threats over their speaker votes --Lawmakers swearing & yelling at each other in closed-door meeting
Clarifies the previous Democratic show-down between US Reps. Barbara Lee, Katie Porter and Adam Schiff.
Sen. Butler in the race, would have further depressed Rep. Lee's already depressed odds.
Note that under CA Top Two Primary law, entirely possible that the two finalists for 2024 general election ballot for US Senator could both be Democrats. Particularly IF multiple Republican candidates spit the GOP primary vote.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
I have to say it would surprise me if the Conservative hold on to Mid Beds though in GE terms it looks one of those places that stays blue even when the party is in core vote territory nationally. Its a by election so you'd expect a bit of an added protest vote.
In the Middle East, the US might choose to lay down a marker in the next day or two.
This Covid inquiry will end WhatsApp use in government.
People will go back to picking up the phone or meeting for lunch.
Jim Reed @jim_reed Just seen some brutal WhatsApps at #covidinquiry. Sent between Dame Angela McLean (now gov's chief scientific adviser) and Prof Edmunds when they were in (infamous) No10 zoom meeting on 20/9. McLean asks "Who is this fuckwit?" - apparent reference to Prof Carl Heneghan. 1/2
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
I suspect Labour winning Tamworth, a two party competition, but losing mid Beds where the Lib Dems competed is actually a very good result. It keeps up the narrative that things are close and avoids complacency, while having no impact in a real election where the Lib Dems will be focussing on 20-30 seats that are more natural territory for them where Labour will be nowhere.
For the Lib Dems it shows there are limits to their by election powers.
For the Tories it gives them some false hope. Albeit it they win Tamworth too it'll be a genuinely good result.
Question re; Tamworth - Does the Tamworth Manifesto still resonate with local voters, and with what likely impact on the by-election result?
Most people in Tamworth probably haven't heard of the Tamworth Manifesto, sadly. Therefore very little impact on the by-election. Schools don't usually teach that sort of thing, unless you do history at A-Level, which is a small percentage.
This Covid inquiry will end WhatsApp use in government.
People will go back to picking up the phone or meeting for lunch.
Jim Reed @jim_reed Just seen some brutal WhatsApps at #covidinquiry. Sent between Dame Angela McLean (now gov's chief scientific adviser) and Prof Edmunds when they were in (infamous) No10 zoom meeting on 20/9. McLean asks "Who is this fuckwit?" - apparent reference to Prof Carl Heneghan. 1/2
Regulation of financial services mean I could lose my job and get into trouble if I used WhatsApp to discuss work with colleagues. Because of rules around recorded communications etc.
I see no reason why government officials should be held to lower standards.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Angela Smith @angelasmithmp · 35m Not one of the voters I contacted today in Mid Bedfordshire admitted to voting Tory, never mind naming the candidate. Won’t Say and Against was as far as I got in identifying the opposition vote.
This Covid inquiry will end WhatsApp use in government.
People will go back to picking up the phone or meeting for lunch.
Jim Reed @jim_reed Just seen some brutal WhatsApps at #covidinquiry. Sent between Dame Angela McLean (now gov's chief scientific adviser) and Prof Edmunds when they were in (infamous) No10 zoom meeting on 20/9. McLean asks "Who is this fuckwit?" - apparent reference to Prof Carl Heneghan. 1/2
Regulation of financial services mean I could lose my job and get into trouble if I used WhatsApp to discuss work with colleagues. Because of rules around recorded communications etc.
I see no reason why government officials should be held to lower standards.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Sadly, China has much better trains...
Impossible, how could they possibly have trains without having had the benefit of British rule?
What time will we get the by-election results? Mid Bedfordshire will be the first to report, with results expected at around 1.30am. Results of the contest in Tamworth are expected at around 3.00am, though both could be delayed if a recount is needed.
What time will we get the by-election results? Mid Bedfordshire will be the first to report, with results expected at around 1.30am. Results of the contest in Tamworth are expected at around 3.00am, though both could be delayed if a recount is needed.
A lot of people seem to agree that the 1:30am time for Mid Beds is rather doubtful. Not sure where they got that from.
What time will we get the by-election results? Mid Bedfordshire will be the first to report, with results expected at around 1.30am. Results of the contest in Tamworth are expected at around 3.00am, though both could be delayed if a recount is needed.
A lot of people seem to agree that the 1:30am time for Mid Beds is rather doubtful. Not sure where they got that from.
Volcaholic 🌋 @volcaholic1 · 6h 1/2 Things are changing rapidly in Scotland now. The Red weather warning (risk to life) has just come into force. Here's two video's of the same bridge in the Angus Glens 😱👇
Question re; Tamworth - Does the Tamworth Manifesto still resonate with local voters, and with what likely impact on the by-election result?
Most people in Tamworth probably haven't heard of the Tamworth Manifesto, sadly. Therefore very little impact on the by-election. Schools don't usually teach that sort of thing, unless you do history at A-Level, which is a small percentage.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Sadly, China has much better trains...
Impossible, how could they possibly have trains without having had the benefit of British rule?
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Sadly, China has much better trains...
Impossible, how could they possibly have trains without having had the benefit of British rule?
China didn't get trains for 20 years after India did
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Until 1997. China became wealthier in the 1980s and 1980s and grew rapidly as Deng shifted from communism towards capitalism while India was largely under the centre left Congress.
Now Xi is shifting back towards elements of Maoism while Modi and the BJP are moving towards capitalism and Indian growth rate has now overtaken Chinese growth rate
Wow! How about this for a costume! (The gent on the right!) This isn’t one of the candidates in the Mid Beds by-election but the High Sheriff of Bedfordshire, Russell Beard, who’s returning officer & will be announcing the result! Never seen a returning officer in costume before!"
Stewart Wood @StewartWood · 30m Aside from everything else that flows from a ground invasion, it is hard to envisage the conditions under which Israel will be haopy to withdraw its military from Gaza once they have gone in.
Yep. It's a military trap and they will rue the day.
Got back to Oxford just now after 14 hours in mid-Beds. Impressions:
* The Conservatives were barely trying. I was at the largest Flitwick polling station from 7am for 3 hours, and there was no Tory teller. I didn't see any sign of a Tory knock-up, and just one Tory poster. Nonetheless, it is a bedrock Tory area and there are lots of Tory voters who don't need to be coralled into voting. But my guess is that their vote dropped by 50-65% over the GE. I actually think they were short of activists.
* LibDems were trying hard (Verulamus, of this parish, joined me at the pollling station for a couple of rather convivial hours). In the end the LD/Lab poster count was similar, and we certainly found Labour voters in the knock-up who had been seduced by the "Winning here" stuff into tactically voting LD. I even met a spiritual twin of Barnesian - a Labour voter who voted LibDem in the hope of getting a Tory win which would "knock Starmer and Davey's heads together".
* Nonetheless, the LibDem impact was patchy, and from a low base. They were competitive in some areas, and barely visible in others. I remain convinced that they're not close to winning and will come third.
* The Labour effort was humungous. The main campaign office (there were three) were running 180 boards, sending wave after wave of knockers-up starting at 10am. There must have been over 500 people involved during the day, coordinated by the national General Secretary, David Evans. I walked 24000 steps in the numerous rounds I was in all day, and I wasn't at all unusual. But I don't know if it was enough. The combined effect of the Tory default vote and the LibDem spoiler tactics is a lot to overcome, and I'm not sure we did it...but we may have done.
My guess: Con 35, Lab 32, LibDem 23, others 10...but all figures +/-5.
Beth Rigby @BethRigby · 1h On Tamworth. Two Labour sources telling me they positive on taking that seat. Context: someone pointed out to me that Tamworth replaced SE Staffordshire constituency in '97.
Angela Smith @angelasmithmp · 35m Not one of the voters I contacted today in Mid Bedfordshire admitted to voting Tory, never mind naming the candidate. Won’t Say and Against was as far as I got in identifying the opposition vote.
Well that's an unbiased sample. Should she really be keeping mp as part of her twitter handle?
Beth Rigby @BethRigby · 1h On Tamworth. Two Labour sources telling me they positive on taking that seat. Context: someone pointed out to me that Tamworth replaced SE Staffordshire constituency in '97.
95% the same constituency. A couple of smallish villages removed from the seat.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Sadly, China has much better trains...
Impossible, how could they possibly have trains without having had the benefit of British rule?
China didn't get trains for 20 years after India did
India doesn't have high speed, China has 26,000 miles of high speed railway routes.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Sadly, China has much better trains...
Impossible, how could they possibly have trains without having had the benefit of British rule?
China didn't get trains for 20 years after India did
I think everybody agrees that Chinese trains are much better than Indian ones.
Indeed, and pushed the Leave price out to 14 at 10.20pm.
Always said he was a good chap, helped quite a few of us out there.
IIRC he started to spin the need for a second referendum?
Those were the days. 2015, Trump, and Brexit all generated 10/1 profits at near zero risk due to analysis on this site (yes I’ve donated to running costs, when asked, to reflect that).
I remember the EU referendum evening, when it was absolutely obvious that Leave had won, and yet being able to keep putting money on at odds of evens or better. It was absolute madness; the freest of free money.
My only regret was my inherent caution stopping me sticking on all available liquid cash. It was free money. But one day that caution will save my shirt.
Spare a thought for me, who, having drunk several whiskies in despair, piled in on what I thought was Leave knowing it was free money, only to realise I’d actually backed Remain - and had to spend an agonising 20 minutes trying to lay it off.
Not my finest hour.
Ouch. I’m guessing the rest bottle of the bottle then went down the hatch?
Angela Smith @angelasmithmp · 35m Not one of the voters I contacted today in Mid Bedfordshire admitted to voting Tory, never mind naming the candidate. Won’t Say and Against was as far as I got in identifying the opposition vote.
Well that's an unbiased sample. Should she really be keeping mp as part of her twitter handle?
If she was being sent to talk to any Tory voters on polling day, it would be an immense failure of the Labour GOTV operation
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Until 1997. China became wealthier in the 1980s and 1980s and grew rapidly as Deng shifted from communism towards capitalism while India was largely under the centre left Congress.
Now Xi is shifting back towards elements of Maoism while Modi and the BJP are moving towards capitalism and Indian growth rate has now overtaken Chinese growth rate
Hong Kong was certainly not "fully democratic" until 1997.
Yes democratic India grew much slower than China for decades.
Demographics and the fact that China is already an upper middle income country mean that India is likely to grow faster than China for some years. But it's still a long long way to catch up.
But my happiness at a swollen purse was overshadowed by the disaster of the result.
Cameron's fault for not running a single positive broadcast during the campaign. It was all negative. Still can't believe they did that. I kept waiting for a positive PPB about how wonderful Europe is, all these marvellous cities, wonderful scenery, etc. Maybe they thought that would be too kitsch or something, too "lower working-class aspirations". But it would have changed the result to 51-49 in favour of Remain in my opinion.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Sadly, China has much better trains...
Impossible, how could they possibly have trains without having had the benefit of British rule?
China didn't get trains for 20 years after India did
I think everybody agrees that Chinese trains are much better than Indian ones.
You just might get dragged off the train and never seen again or shot in the former
Got back to Oxford just now after 14 hours in mid-Beds. Impressions:
* The Conservatives were barely trying. I was at the largest Flitwick polling station from 7am for 3 hours, and there was no Tory teller. I didn't see any sign of a Tory knock-up, and just one Tory poster. Nonetheless, it is a bedrock Tory area and there are lots of Tory voters who don't need to be coralled into voting. But my guess is that their vote dropped by 50-65% over the GE. I actually think they were short of activists.
* LibDems were trying hard (Verulamus, of this parish, joined me at the pollling station for a couple of rather convivial hours). In the end the LD/Lab poster count was similar, and we certainly found Labour voters in the knock-up who had been seduced by the "Winning here" stuff into tactically voting LD. I even met a spiritual twin of Barnesian - a Labour voter who voted LibDem in the hope of getting a Tory win which would "knock Starmer and Davey's heads together".
* Nonetheless, the LibDem impact was patchy, and from a low base. They were competitive in some areas, and barely visible in others. I remain convinced that they're not close to winning and will come third.
* The Labour effort was humungous. The main campaign office (there were three) were running 180 boards, sending wave after wave of knockers-up starting at 10am. There must have been over 500 people involved during the day, coordinated by the national General Secretary, David Evans. I walked 24000 steps in the numerous rounds I was in all day, and I wasn't at all unusual. But I don't know if it was enough. The combined effect of the Tory default vote and the LibDem spoiler tactics is a lot to overcome, and I'm not sure we did it...but we may have done.
My guess: Con 35, Lab 32, LibDem 23, others 10...but all figures +/-5.
Were you knocking up in all parts of the constituency, Mr Palmer, or just the urban areas?
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Until 1997. China became wealthier in the 1980s and 1980s and grew rapidly as Deng shifted from communism towards capitalism while India was largely under the centre left Congress.
Now Xi is shifting back towards elements of Maoism while Modi and the BJP are moving towards capitalism and Indian growth rate has now overtaken Chinese growth rate
Hong Kong was certainly not "fully democratic" until 1997.
Yes democratic India grew much slower than China for decades.
Demographics and the fact that China is already an upper middle income country mean that India is likely to grow faster than China for some years. But it's still a long long way to catch up.
Hong Kong had an elected multiparty Legislative Council by 1997 and was per capita much wealthier per head than mainland China.
India on current growth trajectory could well overtake China on gdp by 2050
We seem to be hearing this from Labour people, which reads like confidence but they are not getting carried away. If we're hearing nothing from the Tories not even expectations management is that notable?
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Sadly, China has much better trains...
Impossible, how could they possibly have trains without having had the benefit of British rule?
China didn't get trains for 20 years after India did
I think everybody agrees that Chinese trains are much better than Indian ones.
You just might get dragged off the train and never seen again or shot in the former
We seem to be hearing this from Labour people, which reads like confidence but they are not getting carried away. If we're hearing nothing from the Tories not even expectations management is that notable?
Sticking with two Labour gains.
Not sure whether Tory silence means anything at this stage.
I normally don't get very excited by weather but we are now getting a clearer impression of what a red warning feels like. And its not very nice.
I was speaking to a pollster earlier and they reckon it is events like this which really batters the reputation of Sunak and the Tories.
The voters see extreme weather like this as evidence of climate change and Rishi telling us he is abolishing non existent green crap looks bad.
Right so he'll be stopping expansion of coal power stations in India or China. He might as well sit in front of the North and give orders to the waves like a Canute.
We have the wrong green crap
That's not how the voters see it.
Even if there is polling to show that (I’ve not seen any but it might be there), politicians (I’m looking at Starmer) need to actually lead. A section of the public have become neo-religious nutters who think if they flagellate themselves they can reverse the apocalypse. And bizarrely, that is the right word because many of them seem to think climate change will destroy life on earth despite none of the models showing that even in the worst case 3/4 degree increase scenarios, where technology doesn’t advance and we all go back to burning coal.
I despair. I’ve worked on some of the science here and I used to spend my days trying to convince people climate change was an issue and dispelling nonsense like the “hockey stick” graph. Now, because I will not get behind apocalyptic non-scientific forecasts or accept that whether the U.K. bans petrol in 2030 or 2035 will make the slightest difference, I get called the “denier”.
The world has been infantilised. People need to understand that a mix of declared policies and technology change means we’ve more or less fixed the problem. We’ve won. The global temperature will rise by 2-2.5 degrees and some islands will need to be relocated while some agriculture changes. But we’ve done it.
Starmer and his generation get to declare victory.
It's peculiar.
For all of the world's horrors, by any objective measure, there has actually never been a better time to be alive. But, what proportion of the world's population believe that? I'd be surprised if it was even as high as 5%.
Yes. No one seems to want to understand that we’re doing ok.
The telling statistic is that when I was born, in 1967, 55% of the world lived in absolute poverty (itself, a big improvement on 100 years previously). Now, the proportion is 8%.
One of the issues is that if they accepted that improvement, they would also have to see that it was driven by democracy, open markets, and technology. The spreading of westernised civilisation, in fact. But that can’t be right as all those things are imperialist….
FPT What about the rise of China? That had a huge impact on absolute poverty but doesn’t fit your narrative, particularly the democracy part.
China moving from Maoism to Communism had the biggest impact, however had it followed the Hong Kong model rather than the Beijing model rather than imposed the latter on the former it would have done even better
Hard to assess that claim, but I think I agree with the wider supposition that the poverty reduction in China was probably baked in regardless of the particular nature of the government.
Still, it is hard to argue that the poverty reduction that DID happen in reality was driven by either democracy or western values.
It was certainly driven by a move towards capitalism and more mixed private and public industry and away from Maoist communism.
Democracy maybe not but as I said Hong Kong was certainly much richer than the rest of China when a fully democratic British colony and still is today, despite Beijing's attempts to restrict democracy there
Compare China and India.
Indian growth rate this year 8%, Chinese growth rate this year 5%
Not what I meant. Until the 80s both equally poor, since then China became many times wealthier than democratic India. (Also, when was Hong Kong a "fully democratic British colony"?)
Until 1997. China became wealthier in the 1980s and 1980s and grew rapidly as Deng shifted from communism towards capitalism while India was largely under the centre left Congress.
Now Xi is shifting back towards elements of Maoism while Modi and the BJP are moving towards capitalism and Indian growth rate has now overtaken Chinese growth rate
Hong Kong was certainly not "fully democratic" until 1997.
Yes democratic India grew much slower than China for decades.
Demographics and the fact that China is already an upper middle income country mean that India is likely to grow faster than China for some years. But it's still a long long way to catch up.
Hong Kong had an elected multiparty Legislative Council by 1997 and was per capita much wealthier per head than mainland China.
India on current growth trajectory could well overtake China on gdp by 2050
If the predictions of Chinese demographic collapse takes place, it'll be earlier than that.
We seem to be hearing this from Labour people, which reads like confidence but they are not getting carried away. If we're hearing nothing from the Tories not even expectations management is that notable?
Sticking with two Labour gains.
Not sure whether Tory silence means anything at this stage.
Pretty sure it means something. But no clue as to what.
Though am thinking, in light of your report re: indifference to Tamworth manifesto by Tamworthies, you may wish to revise your previous forecasts?
We seem to be hearing this from Labour people, which reads like confidence but they are not getting carried away. If we're hearing nothing from the Tories not even expectations management is that notable?
Sticking with two Labour gains.
Not sure whether Tory silence means anything at this stage.
Pretty sure it means something. But no clue as to what.
Though am thinking, in light of your report re: indifference to Tamworth manifesto by Tamworthies, you may wish to revise your previous forecasts?
Everything I've heard so far sounds good for my predictions, without wishing to sound immodest.
* Labour wasn't using telling for knock-up - we had tellers but their numbers weren't processed, because there were so many rounds going out that it didn't seem worth trying to keep up. A mistake in my opinion - why not use the info as you've got it?
* I did come across a handful of Independent voters. But the Betfair market on Mackey the Indie getting <12.5% is free money (not much left now, though). Also encountered one Reform UK voter.
* The Tory leaflets (and their one huge poster) focused on the controversial plan to build a lot of houses on green belt. There are definitely voters who care about that and who will have raised eyebrows at Starmer's plan to force new affrdable housing through. Whether they care enough to vote Tory is an interesting question, which the Tories were perhaps road-testing here.
* Gina Miller's Truth and Fairness Party (or something like that) was present, with a candidate who nearly won a borough council seat last year, so not a total no-hoper.
* The whole thing was extremely good-humoured - even voters who I was knocking up at 915pm who really, really didn't want to vote, managed to contain their obvious exasperation. And despite our differences the activists from different parties interacted s cheerfluly as usual.
EXCLU: State Dept officials are preparing a dissent cable over Biden's Israel-Palestine policy
"A mutiny [is] brewing within State at all levels,” one official said, as staff describe anger, depression, tears in meetings + rumors more colleagues will quit
* Labour wasn't using telling for knock-up - we had tellers but their numbers weren't processed, because there were so many rounds going out that it didn't seem worth trying to keep up. A mistake in my opinion - why not use the info as you've got it?
* I did come across a handful of Independent voters. But the Betfair market on Mackey the Indie getting
I do think Starmer scored an own goal there . He should have been less confrontational in his language .
Got back to Oxford just now after 14 hours in mid-Beds. Impressions:
* The Conservatives were barely trying. I was at the largest Flitwick polling station from 7am for 3 hours, and there was no Tory teller. I didn't see any sign of a Tory knock-up, and just one Tory poster. Nonetheless, it is a bedrock Tory area and there are lots of Tory voters who don't need to be coralled into voting. But my guess is that their vote dropped by 50-65% over the GE. I actually think they were short of activists.
* LibDems were trying hard (Verulamus, of this parish, joined me at the pollling station for a couple of rather convivial hours). In the end the LD/Lab poster count was similar, and we certainly found Labour voters in the knock-up who had been seduced by the "Winning here" stuff into tactically voting LD. I even met a spiritual twin of Barnesian - a Labour voter who voted LibDem in the hope of getting a Tory win which would "knock Starmer and Davey's heads together".
* Nonetheless, the LibDem impact was patchy, and from a low base. They were competitive in some areas, and barely visible in others. I remain convinced that they're not close to winning and will come third.
* The Labour effort was humungous. The main campaign office (there were three) were running 180 boards, sending wave after wave of knockers-up starting at 10am. There must have been over 500 people involved during the day, coordinated by the national General Secretary, David Evans. I walked 24000 steps in the numerous rounds I was in all day, and I wasn't at all unusual. But I don't know if it was enough. The combined effect of the Tory default vote and the LibDem spoiler tactics is a lot to overcome, and I'm not sure we did it...but we may have done.
My guess: Con 35, Lab 32, LibDem 23, others 10...but all figures +/-5.
Thanks for that Nick and well done.
Here in the Black Country, the entire Labour effort was being directed at Tamworth. I couldn't be there today, but the number of members going across over the past month has blown out of the water anything I've seen before. Lab winning the poster/stakes war hands down, that doesn't mean much since Conservatives rarely display posters other than on farmland, but the absence of any competition from the Lib Dems was telling. Clearly the Conservative vote was very flaky, you just couldn't judge whether it was flaky enough and I couldn't call it.
If you're right about Mid Beds, that may be a blessing in disguise for Labour in the GE across the country as a whole, being possibly even better than a Lab win. A close 2nd for Labour will boost the narrative of wasted LD votes risking letting the Conservatives in, especially if combined with a Labour win in Tamworth. So don't be downhearted at all if that's the outcome.
Highest level ever recorded in Sheffield would be ... bad ... although I think it might be overdone.
I think Fishlake (flooded 2019) will be OK as that was caused by a whole combination of factors but I'm not so sure about some of the places here that flooded in 2007.
Comments
They did next door.
But if they do count first, I really don't think they'd be able to tell sufficiently within 5 minutes of the poll closing how good it was looking unless it was monstrously one sided.
Maybe that's what I'm missing.
But, then, why do we hear Party X won the postals but lost on the day?
Was especially prevalent belief in 2017 GE.
@MZanona
WHERE WE'RE AT:
--Jim Jordan can't get to 217
--Prospects for a resolution to empower interim speaker McHenry look grim
--Members getting death threats over their speaker votes
--Lawmakers swearing & yelling at each other in closed-door meeting
Day 16 without a speaker.
https://twitter.com/MZanona/status/1715068573394096366
California Sen. Laphonza Butler will not seek a full term
Her decision ends speculation that she would scramble an already fierce contest.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/10/19/california-sen-laphonza-butler-will-not-seek-a-full-term-00122584
But you usually can tell the postal votes when they arrive on your table of course because they are much more neatly paper clipped together than the rush job done on the night, and without the mixture of multiple or unconventional fold lines.
For votes larger than a council ward it can be a nightmare if the overall tally is not matching the verified number, everyone has to stay around and hunt for whereever someone accidentally put a bundle of 11 sets of 10 together, or 9 votes in a paperclip instead of 10. Had that happen a Euro election, it was very frustrating.
On Sept. 13, 2013, appraiser Stephen Olvany told David McArdle in an email: “Of course, Eric Trump has lofty ideas on value and assumes $1,000+ psf is no problem.”
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1715043072940339607
NYAG rolls tape on Eric Trump's deposition distancing himself from the appraisals of the property:
"I pour concrete. I operate properties. I don’t focus on appraisals between a law firm and Cushman. This is just not what I do in my day-to-day responsibilities. And you know, I hardly recognize the names on here."...
..Asked if that testimony is consistent with what McArdle recalled of Eric Trump's role, McArdle answers no.
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1715101156534329426
Potential perjury charge there ?
At a UK Parliamentary election, the (A)RO must take reasonable steps to begin counting the votes within four hours of the close of poll at 10pm.
Could have been worse.
Sen. Butler in the race, would have further depressed Rep. Lee's already depressed odds.
Note that under CA Top Two Primary law, entirely possible that the two finalists for 2024 general election ballot for US Senator could both be Democrats. Particularly IF multiple Republican candidates spit the GOP primary vote.
Tamworth: Lab 43.9%, Con 43.7%. Lab gain.
House GOP abandons plan to empower temp speaker
Jim Jordan, who earlier on Thursday indicated that he would pause speaker balloting and back the idea, now could reverse course and go to the floor again.
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2023/10/19/congress/empower-mchenry-dead-00122543
In the Middle East, the US might choose to lay down a marker in the next day or two.
People will go back to picking up the phone or meeting for lunch.
Jim Reed
@jim_reed
Just seen some brutal WhatsApps at #covidinquiry. Sent between Dame Angela McLean (now gov's chief scientific adviser) and Prof Edmunds when they were in (infamous) No10 zoom meeting on 20/9. McLean asks "Who is this fuckwit?" - apparent reference to Prof Carl Heneghan. 1/2
https://twitter.com/jim_reed/status/1715011353696436310
Crikey.
For the Lib Dems it shows there are limits to their by election powers.
For the Tories it gives them some false hope. Albeit it they win Tamworth too it'll be a genuinely good result.
I see no reason why government officials should be held to lower standards.
@angelasmithmp
·
35m
Not one of the voters I contacted today in Mid Bedfordshire admitted to voting Tory, never mind naming the candidate. Won’t Say and Against was as far as I got in identifying the opposition vote.
In county council by election, Shropshire. At ease, everyone
What time will we get the by-election results?
Mid Bedfordshire will be the first to report, with results expected at around 1.30am. Results of the contest in Tamworth are expected at around 3.00am, though both could be delayed if a recount is needed.
@volcaholic1
·
6h
1/2 Things are changing rapidly in Scotland now. The Red weather warning (risk to life) has just come into force. Here's two video's of the same bridge in the Angus Glens 😱👇
https://twitter.com/volcaholic1/status/1715044754696872305
Now Xi is shifting back towards elements of Maoism while Modi and the BJP are moving towards capitalism and Indian growth rate has now overtaken Chinese growth rate
@joncraig
Wow! How about this for a costume! (The gent on the right!) This isn’t one of the candidates in the Mid Beds by-election but the High Sheriff of Bedfordshire, Russell Beard, who’s returning officer & will be announcing the result! Never seen a returning officer in costume before!"
https://twitter.com/joncraig/status/1715135192539521269
@StewartWood
·
30m
Aside from everything else that flows from a ground invasion, it is hard to envisage the conditions under which Israel will be haopy to withdraw its military from Gaza once they have gone in.
Yep. It's a military trap and they will rue the day.
* The Conservatives were barely trying. I was at the largest Flitwick polling station from 7am for 3 hours, and there was no Tory teller. I didn't see any sign of a Tory knock-up, and just one Tory poster. Nonetheless, it is a bedrock Tory area and there are lots of Tory voters who don't need to be coralled into voting. But my guess is that their vote dropped by 50-65% over the GE. I actually think they were short of activists.
* LibDems were trying hard (Verulamus, of this parish, joined me at the pollling station for a couple of rather convivial hours). In the end the LD/Lab poster count was similar, and we certainly found Labour voters in the knock-up who had been seduced by the "Winning here" stuff into tactically voting LD. I even met a spiritual twin of Barnesian - a Labour voter who voted LibDem in the hope of getting a Tory win which would "knock Starmer and Davey's heads together".
* Nonetheless, the LibDem impact was patchy, and from a low base. They were competitive in some areas, and barely visible in others. I remain convinced that they're not close to winning and will come third.
* The Labour effort was humungous. The main campaign office (there were three) were running 180 boards, sending wave after wave of knockers-up starting at 10am. There must have been over 500 people involved during the day, coordinated by the national General Secretary, David Evans. I walked 24000 steps in the numerous rounds I was in all day, and I wasn't at all unusual. But I don't know if it was enough. The combined effect of the Tory default vote and the LibDem spoiler tactics is a lot to overcome, and I'm not sure we did it...but we may have done.
My guess: Con 35, Lab 32, LibDem 23, others 10...but all figures +/-5.
@BethRigby
·
1h
On Tamworth. Two Labour sources telling me they positive on taking that seat. Context: someone pointed out to me that Tamworth replaced SE Staffordshire constituency in '97.
https://check-for-flooding.service.gov.uk/station/8124
@LewisJWarner
Labour bods in Tamworth still feel this is close.
They’re watching the votes pile up in pretty even stacks.
In some places there’s a Tory lead, and vice versa.
Waiting for boxes from all of the wards before claiming to have a good idea of what’s going on.
@itvcentral
11:54 PM · Oct 19, 2023"
https://twitter.com/LewisJWarner/status/1715139305742487595
Yes democratic India grew much slower than China for decades.
Demographics and the fact that China is already an upper middle income country mean that India is likely to grow faster than China for some years. But it's still a long long way to catch up.
India on current growth trajectory could well overtake China on gdp by 2050
Sticking with two Labour gains.
"Crime falls to lowest level on record, ONS says"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67161967
Though am thinking, in light of your report re: indifference to Tamworth manifesto by Tamworthies, you may wish to revise your previous forecasts?
* Labour wasn't using telling for knock-up - we had tellers but their numbers weren't processed, because there were so many rounds going out that it didn't seem worth trying to keep up. A mistake in my opinion - why not use the info as you've got it?
* I did come across a handful of Independent voters. But the Betfair market on Mackey the Indie getting <12.5% is free money (not much left now, though). Also encountered one Reform UK voter.
* The Tory leaflets (and their one huge poster) focused on the controversial plan to build a lot of houses on green belt. There are definitely voters who care about that and who will have raised eyebrows at Starmer's plan to force new affrdable housing through. Whether they care enough to vote Tory is an interesting question, which the Tories were perhaps road-testing here.
* Gina Miller's Truth and Fairness Party (or something like that) was present, with a candidate who nearly won a borough council seat last year, so not a total no-hoper.
* The whole thing was extremely good-humoured - even voters who I was knocking up at 915pm who really, really didn't want to vote, managed to contain their obvious exasperation. And despite our differences the activists from different parties interacted s cheerfluly as usual.
"A mutiny [is] brewing within State at all levels,” one official said, as staff describe anger, depression, tears in meetings + rumors more colleagues will quit
https://x.com/akbarsahmed/status/1715137995613852055
Here in the Black Country, the entire Labour effort was being directed at Tamworth. I couldn't be there today, but the number of members going across over the past month has blown out of the water anything I've seen before. Lab winning the poster/stakes war hands down, that doesn't mean much since Conservatives rarely display posters other than on farmland, but the absence of any competition from the Lib Dems was telling. Clearly the Conservative vote was very flaky, you just couldn't judge whether it was flaky enough and I couldn't call it.
If you're right about Mid Beds, that may be a blessing in disguise for Labour in the GE across the country as a whole, being possibly even better than a Lab win. A close 2nd for Labour will boost the narrative of wasted LD votes risking letting the Conservatives in, especially if combined with a Labour win in Tamworth. So don't be downhearted at all if that's the outcome.
https://check-for-flooding.service.gov.uk/station/8248
Highest level ever recorded in Sheffield would be ... bad ... although I think it might be overdone.
I think Fishlake (flooded 2019) will be OK as that was caused by a whole combination of factors but I'm not so sure about some of the places here that flooded in 2007.
Scottish-American economist. Not the actor of the similar name from HIGNFY
My prediction of 39% was too optimistic.