Categories
However hard LAB presses Rishi is the one who’ll decide the date – politicalbetting.com
However hard LAB presses Rishi is the one who’ll decide the date – politicalbetting.com
Rishi’s bottled it.We say bring it on.Britain needs a general election now. Agree? Sign the petition.https://t.co/WVvNN0hmch
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It is perfectly appropriate and very effective politics to hound Sunak throughout 2024 with the charge that he is bottling it, and running scared of the electorate.
OGH says, "It is hard to argue that has Sunak bottled it when it is blindingly obvious that his party would face near-certain defeat."
No, Mike. It is all too easy to argue that Sunak has bottled it due to his fear of being judged by the electorate, and it's good politics.
I also think it’s more nuanced than “Turkey's don’t vote for Christmas.” For example, in deciding your date you gather all sorts of data and do all kinds of modelling - one such model might show the economic mood will look good in the spring, where you can generate a vibe of a corner turned allowing money back into pockets, whilst same model shows later in year during a recession, fear of bankruptcies, negative growth, , emptying order books, everything will feel gloomy like it’s going backwards again. Faced with that modelling politicians would choose to go earlier. Which I think has happened, the election is definitely in May.
The other thing wrong with Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas is Turkeys arn’t thinking about their life after politics. Some in government may already be rich but I bet can’t wait to start earning proper money compared to what they are on now, once put out of this current misery.
Can anyone think of a PM going before he had to when it was virtually certain he'd lose? All the precedent is in the other direction: Brown in 2010, Major in 1997, Callaghan in 1979, Douglas-Home in 1964. So is self-interest: presumably Sunak likes being PM so why cut it short.
And, who knows, Starmer in 2030?
And most especially when public is indifferent, non-supportive, opposed, unimpressed, depressed, unresponsive, and just plain fed up with the government.
Elder Smithson spakes the truth in parts. Yet even thus, still possible for
In USA, not even Donald Trump believe that Joe Biden is delaying the November election in order to prolong his grasp on power and/or postpone the Verdict of the People.
Yet even given what Mike says, still possible for millions of voters to conclude that Rishi Sunak IS delaying the next general election. Even folks with limited political information/interest mostly know that power to set a date is his as Prime Minister.
So seems to make sense, for Labour to bring it up on regular basis until he does it. For one thing, gives Starmer & Etc. something resembling an issue to talk about, while they're still trying to maintain the cloak of Fabian disengagement as long as desirable, and possible, before then.
The current lot have no plan.
It is perfectly obvious to me that we have made up our minds that we need a change of government.
Is stating this self-evident fact somehow impolite?
Is Sunak's relationship with HM Treasury another, and powerful, factor? Provided that it's largely in one direction, anyway . . . leastways from the whomever it is from that quarter whispering into Rishi's shell-like ear.
"The Leader of the Labour Party and His Majesty's Loyal Opposition respectfully advises, that the Prime Minister consider his position. Hopefully sometime before next Christmas."
The right thing for Sunak's party is to maximise the number of seats retained. That screams May at 500 decibels.
The right thing for Sunak personally is to hang on, hoping that something happens. He doesn't give a damn if the Labour majority is 200 or 20 - either way, he's finished.
The likelihood is that a November election would be worse than a May one as the "running scared" narrative builds and defeat follows defeat in Wellingborough, the locals, and Blackpool. But both central estimates involve defeat, whereas basic uncertainty means there is at least some tiny chance something will happen on some odd Autumn day to transform the landscape.
To which the Liberals came up with the rejoinder - "Not Yet"
Who do you think won THAT election?
What did him in in the end (beyond The Pardon) was saying that Soviets did NOT dominate Poland.
Ironic in that events in following decades showed that Jerry actually DID have a point. Just didn't know how to convey it.
Whilst it was widely ridiculed, it's not a terrible approach per se. Sunak's problem is he doesn't know who he is and can't just decide and stick to it anyway. He has to choose which Rishi Sunak he is, otherwise it's all a disaster.
From the Conservative point of view, there's no argument at all for going early and every argument for delay.
The current problem is not with the government, it's with the whole political and governmental class. In particular they run things as a permanent election campaign, so never do things that are unpopular in the short term which will deliver benefits in the long term. And there's no grounds for thinking that Labour will be any better than the Conservatives on this.
As longtime US Rep and GOP congressional leader, Ford would almost certainly had better relations with the then-Democratic-controlled Congress than did Jimmy Carter. Who began his term by insulting Speaker Tip O'Neill (presumably to burnish his DC Ousider credentials). Then worsened the relationship. Doubtful Jerry would have done that. Or rather impossible.
However, also think it likely that a 2nd-term President Jerry would have been confronted by the same massive (as per usual) economic challenges as the actual 1-term President Jimmy. AND also by Iranian Revolution and Hostage Crisis. And likely (IMHO) to have about as much success with all of the above.
Thus leaving a less-than-optimum launching pad for Ronald Reagan's 1980 campaign against whomever won the Democratic nomination, almost certainly NOT Carter.
With result that after twelve years of Republican rule, the Democrats would be a very good bet to win the White House. And after weathering the Recession of early 1980s benefiting for the rest of the decade from recovery and prosperity - something approaching . . . wait for it . . . Morning in America . . .
Losing by 200 is different from losing by 20 for the Conservative Party. It really isn't for Sunak. So he'd rather hang on based on the off chance, whereas they want to maximise expected number of seats. Totally different things.
Any government holding a general election over the NHS winter crisis period is the ultimate example of a turkey voting for Christmas.
As a young speechwriter I wrote the following line for a Labour Leader’s Conference Speech:
“You can delay the people’s choice. You will not change the people’s verdict.”
*) There are *rumours* that Gerasimov has been injured or killed in an attack on Crimea.
*) There are fairly solid suggestions that Russia has started using North Korean ballistic missiles. Obviously an indication that Russia has plenty of its own missiles...
And this Government is well past that point - it's spent the last year trying to solve a 15-20 point polling deficit. But the people looking at it are so dumb they can't see that their tack to the right is removing voters not gaining them.
And the recent demographic changes to his constituency makes that a slight possibility in the way it never would have been before...
Voters in Illinois have filed a petition to remove Donald Trump from the state’s Republican primary ballot, echoing efforts in other states to bar the former president from returning to the White House over his role in the 6 January capitol attack.
The petition, similar to those filed in more than a dozen other states, relies on the 14th amendment to the constitution.
And the weakness is on the side of both a Republican party playing stupid partisan games, and a US president who is unwilling or unable to sell the risks to the American public.
There are several areas of obvious ongoing conflict:
*) Russia - Ukraine.
*) Israel - Gaza - West Bank
*) Houtis - Red Sea
*) Iran - everyone
Then there are the potential ones:
*) North Korea - South Korea
*) China - Taiwan
The US - and even the West - cannot hope to deal with all of these at once, without going onto a war footing. And we have sleepwalked into a situation where we have allowed smaller conflicts to grow.
We are living in very dangerous times. And I cannot see a Biden 2 or Trump 2 presidency dealing with them in any way effectively.
If America or Britain or Germany want to stay both competitive and prosperous, they need to invest heavily to onshore manufacturing. We are all more expensive than China, but we can get cheaper by investing in skills and technology.
A change from laisse-faire free marketism into a more mercantilist position is the Brexit that a lot of people in the producer sector- farming and fishing as examples - voted for...
From 4 March, Americans will see Trump having to sit in a Washington Federal Courthouse for six to seven hours a day. Court attendance by the accused is obligatory in criminal cases. He might have to do this for two months and keep his mouth shut the entire time. All the while he will be considering the probability that no-nonsense Judge Tanya Chutkan, who has already dealt harsh sentences to 6 January 2021 rioters, will send him down for years.
He might want to avoid the agony and humiliation by upping and running before the trials even start. LeBoutillier doubts that Trump will walk into the DC court room. “He either will become sick and unable to stand trial, or he will make a plea deal to avoid prison,” he writes.
“A plea deal would fit with Trump’s longtime modus operandi. In civil litigation he is all bluster, and then, at the last minute, he settles. He will do that in this case, too: Negotiate a deal in which he pleads guilty and withdraws from the campaign in return for a guarantee that he will not be sent to prison. Facing three other criminal trials, he may very well agree to a Universal Plea Agreement that keeps him out of prison on all cases in exchange for a guilty plea and an admission of responsibility.
Patricia Crouse, a politics professor at the University of New Haven, agrees. “I have long believed that one way or another, Trump will find an “exit ramp” to let him walk away from the election with his reputation intact, at least among the Maga crowd,” she says.
It's a shame it's not a week earlier though - because I suspect Trump will win Super Tuesday based on Maga sympathy votes...
Tories and their fellow travellers remain occasionally optimistic and often argumentative ("you're all the same as us, Sunak has no plan" etc). But generally realist in understanding: its over.
Even if Sunak came up with new pledges for 2024 to replace the failed pledges of 2023, nobody is listening. Nor are there realistic signs of significant improvement in the areas that Tories supposedly focus on - indeed the metrics all show a worsening position.
Sunak's only choice is when and how. And yesterday's fun opens the door to May being the positive choice, the unexpected surprise. Calling an election on his terms off the back of a winter offensive and giveaway budget. Or linger on until expiry.
A crime which as you point out carries substantial jail time.
40 hours. Am in ketosis. Feel light headed and sleepy and weird
What a shame that “pull down everything” Johnson abolished theFTPA. With that, we knew where we were!
I’ve been reading about fasts. There is quite a literature on fasts, now
It all makes sense from a Darwinian perspective. If you go into a severe fast your body thinks you cannot find anything to hunt kill and eat so it tells the metabolism to adapt
When you have the chance to rest you will rest and nap and conserve energy. But when you do something you do it with total commitment - your body wants you to succeed at hunting. You scan the horizon for prey with extra acuity
I assumed fasting was not necessarily good for you and I do tend to put the weight back on after a bit (Lost 8 kg prior to my last May cycle ride, 5 of those are back on), but I notice you have said you have read it is good for you. I am interested in knowing more about that?
On a pedantic point I note your Darwinian comments. We may well have evolved out of that by now (or maybe not). We have had generations where the need to do that has gone so it is not a trait that represents the fittest of the species (the survivors) and therefore likely to be passed down as much. I thought the same sometime ago when you compared dogs to wolves. Again dogs have gone through a huge evolutionary change due to domestication and so can't be compared to wolves in behaviour. It is worth noting that sometime ago dog trainers relied on that relationship in the techniques they use. That has gone out of fashion now as not being correct.
In summary: he has achieved two (halving inflation and growing the economy), which were easy to achieve. He has not achieved the others (debt falling, NHS waiting lists, stopping the boats).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-67883143
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8932957/
Give it a few more days and then all that stuff will kick in big style.
I feel cleansed. I lose weight. I stop boozing. I detox my liver
And - as Dr @Foxy nofes - there is now an ample literature on the many benefits of fasting. Autophagy!
See also the literature on increased longevity in animals with severely reduced calorific intake
We aren’t meant for a life of easeful plenty with three square sugary meals a day. We are built for a life on the savage plains - eat an antelope once every 3 days. Go without at other times
https://www.mattgoodwin.org/p/the-big-tory-lie?utm_campaign=email-half-post&r=1mnpci&utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Once you pass 2nd May you're essentially holding out for the safety car.
I've not ever gone that far with fasting but am partial to the occasional 20 hours or so without food.
I got really chubby in early middle age - 2 stone overweight. I lost it all with a mixture of sensible eating, lots of exercise, and periodic fasting
I then KEPT up the regime of intermittent or periodic fasting for fifteen years and stayed around 80-82kg. My ideal weight
I also exercised and I drank too much booze
Covid fucked all this up. I stopped exercising so much. I gave up fasting as life was so boring all I had was meals. I carried on boozing. I put on the 2 stone and more and it has only slowly slowly shifted (using Ozempic as well)
I am now determined to lose the Covid blob and go back to my ideal weight so I am returning to fasting. With the added austerity of really cutting back on the booze as well
Fasting works for me. I did it before all the literature came out about it being good for you and now I’m doing it again, this time with science cheering me on
Good luck with that.
For starters, his obsessive repeating of 'elite universities' is BS and unless he"s stupid he knows it. Even the best universities, including Cambridge, have wide variations in quality between faculties.
For another his 'MAs of typically less than eighteen months' - well, yes. Typically they last one year. Why is that a bad thing? Does he want them wasting time on write up years with no funding to support them?
'PhDs at elite universities' - here he does have more of a point becuase it is actually better to do research degrees like a PhD or even an MPhil at a research focussed university, for all sorts of practical reasons (not least, the extra resources available). But that also means they would be here longer, and he was saying they shouldn't be.
(It's even more puzzling given he teaches at the University of Kent which, like Bath or Aberystwyth, is a research uni but not Russell Group, and has 41% international intake. So he's actually one of the worst offenders by his own criteria. I wonder if the Pro-Vice Chancellor might call him in for a quiet word.)
Cutting out ultra processed shite is definitely a wise strategy, though.
Anyone betting (& if so, where) ?
I think it's reasonable to conclude the last couple of decades of globalisation were good for the world's population (putting aside ecological considerations for a moment) and bad for the Western working class. But there's then a mixed picture of evidence on mercantilist policies - rich countries with more protectionist rules generally faring less well on average than those with open economies, with the partial exception of major natural resource exporters, but the picture also being messy because of bloc-level internal free trade with external mercantilism as per the USA and EU.
So what's the policy answer to that? Difficult.
I’m now trying to repeat that
Hello and welcome to PB Weight Watchers (with Fasters Anonymous)
Increasing calories out, rather than restricting those going in (or perhaps both).
The exercise is also building muscle - increasing your metabolism.
It is true, however, that all universities seek to raise cash from overseas students, and indeed that this is deliberate government policy. The UK government does not want to pay universities the money they need for teaching home students or for doing research.
Ok, inferring from other posts that you *are* having water not fasting from it.
I still think the Tories lose badly either way. <= ALERT. THIS SENTENCE IS A HOSTAGE TO FORTUNE
multiple articles - popular and scholarly
It actually interests me above and beyond weight loss. It is, of course, a known spiritual technique. It is also used by Silicon Valley tech bros when they have a particularly hard problem to solve
Don’t eat for 48 hours. The brain clears and focuses on that tasty gazelle in the far far distance
There are mental benefits too, which is why some form of fasting is pretty much a universal feature of religions. Muslims find Ramadan very spiritual for example, though not unusual to gain weight from feasting. It does rather upset diabetes quite a lot.
Biologically we did evolve for constant grazing rather than intermittent feasting, as that is what other primates do. We are not dogs or lions. The fasting of primates is largely due to lack of opportunity for feasting.
We do have a craving for high calorie food in a way that we just don't get for vegetables, though it is possible to discipline oneself away from these. There is even a hypothesis that the proclivity for diabetes T2 in South Asians is because of its biological advantage in putting on weight quickly when food is abundant in order to last the period when it isn't. The argument is that in countries with more perennial food supplies such as Europe, that is less the case.