1931 in reverse grows closer – politicalbetting.com

System

1931 in reverse grows closer – politicalbetting.com

?RECORD BREAKING @IpsosUK VOTING INTENTION ?Lab: 44%Con: 19%Reform: 13%Lib Dems: 9%Greens: 9%Other: 6%Lowest the Conservatives have ever polled with us across 45 years of surveys (breaking last month’s record)https://t.co/pWetwVfsU5 pic.twitter.com/cjBVcwxwcx

Read the full story here

LostPassword

Comment One.

DavidL

The last point is the most significant. No one with a brain would want to take over this car crash before the election. Which doesn't rule out Truss, of course.

PS, Robbed, I was, robbed.

Stark_Dawning

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

LostPassword

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

MattW

Fifth Column.

If you print it out in landscape.

OldKingCole

Anyone any news from the Blackpool bye-election? Reform looked to have a reasonably strong candidate. For a bye-election, anyway.

williamglenn

Stark_Dawning said:

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

Blair has bad teeth though. Just imagine how big his majority would have been if he'd gone to Istanbul for veneers.

148grss

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

148grss

I don't really have the pulse on the parliamentary Tory party thinking - do many MPs want an election sooner rather than later to rip off the plaster and go back to tabula rasa, or are they happy sitting around doing nothing with government for as long as possible - with the potential to get even more unpopular with time?

TheScreamingEagles

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

I did think about that but I went for an election with a similar franchise as today.

Heathener

I’ve been suggesting for a while that ‘things can only get worser’.

Sorry for the grammar hammer but if ‘See it, Say it, Sorted’ can get away with it, then so can I.

TheScreamingEagles

DavidL said:

The last point is the most significant. No one with a brain would want to take over this car crash before the election. Which doesn't rule out Truss, of course.

PS, Robbed, I was, robbed.

There's a glitch in allowing first comments on new threads, happened with the morning thread as well.

@rcs1000 needs to investigate.

DougSeal

DavidL said:

The last point is the most significant. No one with a brain would want to take over this car crash before the election. Which doesn't rule out Truss, of course.

PS, Robbed, I was, robbed.

I wouldn't have been. I'll absolutely coin it in if that happened.

williamglenn

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

Leon

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

FF43

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

DougSeal

Stark_Dawning said:

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

What brand? They’ve been taking tips from Gerald. “Ratnered” is going to be replaced by “Trussed” in Urban Dictionary

eek

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

Exactly what is currently the Tory core vote?

DougSeal

eek said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

Exactly what is currently the Tory core vote?

Anyone over 70

Heathener

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Well you have all that with Reform. You may garner 10% at the election, 15% at most but you will have no seats. That kind of thinking, to which you are (currently) aligned will always sit out on the extreme in Britain.

By contrast there will always be a place for a centre-right low taxation AND socially caring party, which is sadly not where the current Conservative party have taken themselves with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country.

148grss

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

I mean, I would argue the problem the Tories have here is after years of feeding their base red meat the Tory base is so right wing they cannot be appeased, and so are likely to go to Reform / UKIP / whatever Farage vehicle turns up. A lurch to the centre (especially on culture war shit that just makes them look like weirdos to a lot of voters) I think would help more than hurt them.

williamglenn

DougSeal said:

Stark_Dawning said:

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

What brand? They’ve been taking tips from Gerald. “Ratnered” is going to be replaced by “Trussed” in Urban Dictionary

It's almost inevitable that Truss's reputation will grow with time (unironically):

- She's starting from zero but her status as an ex-PM means she's still able to get attention
- She has a point about the need for a radical rethink on a number of issues
- People like rooting for the underdog

Pulpstar

Sub Truss ! Blimey.

Personally I think he's not doing too bad a job, but I have to admit communication isn't his forté.

williamglenn

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

I mean, I would argue the problem the Tories have here is after years of feeding their base red meat the Tory base is so right wing they cannot be appeased, and so are likely to go to Reform / UKIP / whatever Farage vehicle turns up. A lurch to the centre (especially on culture war shit that just makes them look like weirdos to a lot of voters) I think would help more than hurt them.

What red meat? The country has been radically transformed by left-wing ideology while they've been in power.

Heathener

Meanwhile I’ve been wending my way through Schengen today.

What an utter dog’s breakfast Brexit is.

LostPassword

148grss said:

I don't really have the pulse on the parliamentary Tory party thinking - do many MPs want an election sooner rather than later to rip off the plaster and go back to tabula rasa, or are they happy sitting around doing nothing with government for as long as possible - with the potential to get even more unpopular with time?

Any individual backbench MP who just wants it all to be over can apply for the Chiltern Hundreds today, or quietly get on with their life while still collecting an MP's salary.

So the question becomes: what does Sunak want?

Sunak appears to be the last person in the country who believes the Tories can still win. If he can just get a flight sent to Rwanda, if inflation would simply piss off and interest rates fall, if the scales would fall from the electorate's eyes and they would see Labour's hypocrisy, etc.

So signs are that he's going to keep going to the end, and why would any Tories be bothered to intervene?

148grss

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

I saved this when I watched it, but because I was on holiday forgot to post it here. A very good video explaining a) why Elon Musk sucks and b) showing how right wing complaints about "wokeness" is literally just an evolution over time of Nazi conspiratorial "Jewish Bolshevism"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDyPSKLy5E4

It's a long video - but enjoyable!

Heathener

williamglenn said:

DougSeal said:

Stark_Dawning said:

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

What brand? They’ve been taking tips from Gerald. “Ratnered” is going to be replaced by “Trussed” in Urban Dictionary

It's almost inevitable that Truss's reputation will grow with time (unironically):

- She's starting from zero but her status as an ex-PM means she's still able to get attention
- She has a point about the need for a radical rethink on a number of issues
- People like rooting for the underdog

If you truly believe this then you are completely out of touch. She engenders utter fury amongst many electors. As someone just said, she Ratnered the brand with her ridiculous budget.

It will take many years before people trust the tories again with their mortgages.

ydoethur

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

OldKingCole

williamglenn said:

DougSeal said:

Stark_Dawning said:

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

What brand? They’ve been taking tips from Gerald. “Ratnered” is going to be replaced by “Trussed” in Urban Dictionary

It's almost inevitable that Truss's reputation will grow with time (unironically):

- She's starting from zero but her status as an ex-PM means she's still able to get attention
- She has a point about the need for a radical rethink on a number of issues
- People like rooting for the underdog

That time is, methinks, quite a long way off.

OnlyLivingBoy

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

I mean, I would argue the problem the Tories have here is after years of feeding their base red meat the Tory base is so right wing they cannot be appeased, and so are likely to go to Reform / UKIP / whatever Farage vehicle turns up. A lurch to the centre (especially on culture war shit that just makes them look like weirdos to a lot of voters) I think would help more than hurt them.

What red meat? The country has been radically transformed by left-wing ideology while they've been in power.

If only!

LostPassword

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

If we judge by the opinion polls, however, every attempt by Sunak to pursue a core vote strategy has only resulted in boosting Reform further.

If Reform were a proper party, and Farage had put in the hard work to build up a core of councillors, etc, I think they'd have a really good shot at surpassing the Tories. But Farage is having too much fun earning money on GB News, so I think the Tories are safe from the ignominy of a Canada-style wipeout.

Heathener

LostPassword said:

148grss said:

I don't really have the pulse on the parliamentary Tory party thinking - do many MPs want an election sooner rather than later to rip off the plaster and go back to tabula rasa, or are they happy sitting around doing nothing with government for as long as possible - with the potential to get even more unpopular with time?

Any individual backbench MP who just wants it all to be over can apply for the Chiltern Hundreds today, or quietly get on with their life while still collecting an MP's salary.

So the question becomes: what does Sunak want?

Sunak appears to be the last person in the country who believes the Tories can still win. If he can just get a flight sent to Rwanda, if inflation would simply piss off and interest rates fall, if the scales would fall from the electorate's eyes and they would see Labour's hypocrisy, etc.

So signs are that he's going to keep going to the end, and why would any Tories be bothered to intervene?

Yeah I agree. I think it has passed the point of no return now.

The problem is that for them to rebuild, a base would be useful both in councils and parliament. The further they fall, the longer it will take to come back.

I am now of the opinion that they could be out of power for 20 years.

Leon

148grss said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

I saved this when I watched it, but because I was on holiday forgot to post it here. A very good video explaining a) why Elon Musk sucks and b) showing how right wing complaints about "wokeness" is literally just an evolution over time of Nazi conspiratorial "Jewish Bolshevism"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDyPSKLy5E4

It's a long video - but enjoyable!

Yeah, no, I'm not gonna waste my time on that. You're a loony

Heathener

Anyway, must go.

Like most people I wish that we could get it over with now and that doesn’t help Sunak’s cause either. Giving the impression of clinging on to power for no good reason only contributes to their decline.

TimS

It really does look like the lesson the Tories take from their upcoming defeat is that they weren't right wing enough. It's Corbyn 2015, Conservative style.

Reform are doing to the Tory activist base what Respect and the Greens did to Labour in the 2000s and 2010s. That spawned Momentum. This has spawned countless "research groups".

Just part of the natural cycle of political psychology I think. After a few years governing party starts to get pressure from impatient backbenchers and membership who don't like the inevitable compromises of power, especially when the equally inevitable economic crisis comes along. Leadership hardens its rhetoric to placate the impatient voices. In doing so alienates some of its swing voters but never succeeds in placating the backbenchers. Party loses. Activists finally have a chance to elect the leadership they really want. That alienates the electorate further. Party loses again. Activists eventually rediscover appetite for winning elections. Elect a leader who speaks the language of the floating voters. Nick some of their opponents more popular policies. Win election. And so ad-infinitum.

Leon

Heathener said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Well you have all that with Reform. You may garner 10% at the election, 15% at most but you will have no seats. That kind of thinking, to which you are (currently) aligned will always sit out on the extreme in Britain.

By contrast there will always be a place for a centre-right low taxation AND socially caring party, which is sadly not where the current Conservative party have taken themselves with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country.

"with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country."

Please, can we not talk about Trans, again

TimS

Leon said:

Heathener said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Well you have all that with Reform. You may garner 10% at the election, 15% at most but you will have no seats. That kind of thinking, to which you are (currently) aligned will always sit out on the extreme in Britain.

By contrast there will always be a place for a centre-right low taxation AND socially caring party, which is sadly not where the current Conservative party have taken themselves with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country.

"with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country."

Please, can we not talk about Trans, again

I thought she was talking about 7 bins.

148grss

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

I mean, I would argue the problem the Tories have here is after years of feeding their base red meat the Tory base is so right wing they cannot be appeased, and so are likely to go to Reform / UKIP / whatever Farage vehicle turns up. A lurch to the centre (especially on culture war shit that just makes them look like weirdos to a lot of voters) I think would help more than hurt them.

What red meat? The country has been radically transformed by left-wing ideology while they've been in power.

Lol - radically changed by left-wing ideology? To live in your reality!

Increasing the temperature on immigration and asylum seekers, banning more and more protests, the increased persecution of trans people, the continued cutting to the bone of public services etc. etc.

Not to mention the dialing up of rhetoric from the Daily Mail (which is essentially the tail wagging the Tory dog) and GB News. Again - the Tories fed the right wing ecosystem but were found lacking (it seems by people like yourself) who seem to believe we live in some lefty utopia after over a decade of Tory led government. It's always more acceptable to shift the Overton window rightwards (because it serves the interests of capital to do so), so some people have fallen off the deep end.

TheScreamingEagles

Pulpstar said:

Sub Truss ! Blimey.

Personally I think he's not doing too bad a job, but I have to admit communication isn't his forté.

Sub Truss?

Chortle.

logical_song

williamglenn said:

DougSeal said:

Stark_Dawning said:

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

What brand? They’ve been taking tips from Gerald. “Ratnered” is going to be replaced by “Trussed” in Urban Dictionary

It's almost inevitable that Truss's reputation will grow with time (unironically):

- She's starting from zero but her status as an ex-PM means she's still able to get attention
- She has a point about the need for a radical rethink on a number of issues
- People like rooting for the underdog

Does the same apply to Sunak?

LostPassword

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

1906. 156 seats out of 670. 23% of the seats, or 151 out of 650.

Thanks.

williamglenn

logical_song said:

williamglenn said:

DougSeal said:

Stark_Dawning said:

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

What brand? They’ve been taking tips from Gerald. “Ratnered” is going to be replaced by “Trussed” in Urban Dictionary

It's almost inevitable that Truss's reputation will grow with time (unironically):

- She's starting from zero but her status as an ex-PM means she's still able to get attention
- She has a point about the need for a radical rethink on a number of issues
- People like rooting for the underdog

Does the same apply to Sunak?

No because he's not really motivated by ideas and doesn't have her thick skin.

Leon

I've just seen a superbly insightful remark about a subject I'm not allowed to discuss. Can I PM it to someone else so they can cut and paste? lol

Pulpstar

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

Given the dual dominance (in terms of voting %, and seats stood) back then of the Liberals and Conservatives and the brutal decline of seats the Tories faced it's probably a good job for Sunak that the AV referendum never passed as whatever the Tory total is this time round my guess is giving over 2nd preferences would likely reduce it further still from what looks to be an already moribund total.

Cyclefree

Worth remembering that the ineffably-useless-utterly-lacking-in-integrity Post Office lawyer, Rodric Williams is STILL employed by the PO and working on the compensation scheme for the SPMs.

Unbelievable.

The PO should not be anywhere near this and the lawyers who have breached their professional duties should have absolutely nothing to do with it.

Is there anyone in the PO or the Business Department with a shred of integrity? Anyone at all?

Andy_JS

Today's surprising fact.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/young-middle-class-women-smoking-rates-rise-63t3ksts2

"Young middle-class women ‘are only group smoking more than a decade ago’

Smoking rates have risen in women under 45 from affluent homes over the past decade, signalling a potential counter-trend that may be driven by anxiety"

148grss

Leon said:

148grss said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

I saved this when I watched it, but because I was on holiday forgot to post it here. A very good video explaining a) why Elon Musk sucks and b) showing how right wing complaints about "wokeness" is literally just an evolution over time of Nazi conspiratorial "Jewish Bolshevism"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDyPSKLy5E4

It's a long video - but enjoyable!

Yeah, no, I'm not gonna waste my time on that. You're a loony

The vacillating between me being a loony and you finding me insightful and interesting really keeps me on my toes. Glad to see you still have an open mind on new perspectives and evidence

148grss

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Sub Truss ! Blimey.

Personally I think he's not doing too bad a job, but I have to admit communication isn't his forté.

Sub Truss?

Chortle.

The day collar discussion is not needed...

Leon

148grss said:

Leon said:

148grss said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

I saved this when I watched it, but because I was on holiday forgot to post it here. A very good video explaining a) why Elon Musk sucks and b) showing how right wing complaints about "wokeness" is literally just an evolution over time of Nazi conspiratorial "Jewish Bolshevism"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDyPSKLy5E4

It's a long video - but enjoyable!

Yeah, no, I'm not gonna waste my time on that. You're a loony

The vacillating between me being a loony and you finding me insightful and interesting really keeps me on my toes. Glad to see you still have an open mind on new perspectives and evidence

You tipped permanently towards "loony" when you flat-out lied about the trans stuff. Sorry, but life is too short

TimS

Heathener said:

williamglenn said:

DougSeal said:

Stark_Dawning said:

It's all looking a bit 1997. I suppose for the Tories there's a bright side and a dark side.

Bright Side: Sir Keir isn't the Toothpaste Man, so turnout for Labour might not be maximized.

Dark Side: Voters are less tribal than they were in 1997, so no one will be reluctantly voting for Rishi out of brand loyalty alone.

What brand? They’ve been taking tips from Gerald. “Ratnered” is going to be replaced by “Trussed” in Urban Dictionary

It's almost inevitable that Truss's reputation will grow with time (unironically):

- She's starting from zero but her status as an ex-PM means she's still able to get attention
- She has a point about the need for a radical rethink on a number of issues
- People like rooting for the underdog

If you truly believe this then you are completely out of touch. She engenders utter fury amongst many electors. As someone just said, she Ratnered the brand with her ridiculous budget.

It will take many years before people trust the tories again with their mortgages.

History suggests politicians rarely rehabilitate their reputation once they've suffered a catastrophe on their watch. Brown didn't. Lamont didn't. Eden didn't. Nor Callaghan. Corbyn. Foot. IDS. The only examples of successful rehabilitation I can think of are Major, and partially Hague.

NickyBreakspear

LostPassword said:

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

1906. 156 seats out of 670. 23% of the seats, or 151 out of 650.

Thanks.

Down from 402 seats out of 670 in the 1900 general election, so a loss of 246 seats.

FF43

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

The Canadian Conservatives haemorrhaged support to the a populist Reform Party such that there were few sensible people left in the Conservative movement.

Not only is history repeating itself. The names are the same.

ydoethur

Cyclefree said:

Worth remembering that the ineffably-useless-utterly-lacking-in-integrity Post Office lawyer, Rodric Williams is STILL employed by the PO and working on the compensation scheme for the SPMs.

Unbelievable.

The PO should not be anywhere near this and the lawyers who have breached their professional duties should have absolutely nothing to do with it.

Is there anyone in the PO or the Business Department with a shred of integrity? Anyone at all?

No.

Just as there isn't in British Gas. OFSTED. The DfE. Ofwat. Ofgem. Thames Water. Lambeth Palace. The Student Loan Company.

We are unfortunately in the age when major organisations (public and private) dominate, and their first principle is to avoid blame for their mistakes. 'Integrity' to these people means 'bullshitting your way out of trouble.'

LostPassword

Pulpstar said:

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

Given the dual dominance (in terms of voting %, and seats stood) back then of the Liberals and Conservatives and the brutal decline of seats the Tories faced it's probably a good job for Sunak that the AV referendum never passed as whatever the Tory total is this time round my guess is giving over 2nd preferences would likely reduce it further still from what looks to be an already moribund total.

This makes me think of a couple of questions.
1. How many seats will the Tories win at the next election with a vote share greater than 50%?
2. In which seat will the Tories win their greatest share of the vote, and what share will that be?

TimS

Pulpstar said:

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

Given the dual dominance (in terms of voting %, and seats stood) back then of the Liberals and Conservatives and the brutal decline of seats the Tories faced it's probably a good job for Sunak that the AV referendum never passed as whatever the Tory total is this time round my guess is giving over 2nd preferences would likely reduce it further still from what looks to be an already moribund total.

Not necessarily everywhere. I assume a lot of people putting Reform first choice would have Tory second.

Leon

148grss said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

Sub Truss ! Blimey.

Personally I think he's not doing too bad a job, but I have to admit communication isn't his forté.

Sub Truss?

Chortle.

The day collar discussion is not needed...

A discussion we are only having because I spotted it after watcing her debate for two minutes. Ahem

ydoethur

LostPassword said:

Pulpstar said:

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

Given the dual dominance (in terms of voting %, and seats stood) back then of the Liberals and Conservatives and the brutal decline of seats the Tories faced it's probably a good job for Sunak that the AV referendum never passed as whatever the Tory total is this time round my guess is giving over 2nd preferences would likely reduce it further still from what looks to be an already moribund total.

This makes me think of a couple of questions.
1. How many seats will the Tories win at the next election with a vote share greater than 50%?
2. In which seat will the Tories win their greatest share of the vote, and what share will that be?

If they get a vote share greater than 50%, probably quite a lot...

Andy_JS

LostPassword said:

Pulpstar said:

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

Given the dual dominance (in terms of voting %, and seats stood) back then of the Liberals and Conservatives and the brutal decline of seats the Tories faced it's probably a good job for Sunak that the AV referendum never passed as whatever the Tory total is this time round my guess is giving over 2nd preferences would likely reduce it further still from what looks to be an already moribund total.

This makes me think of a couple of questions.
1. How many seats will the Tories win at the next election with a vote share greater than 50%?
2. In which seat will the Tories win their greatest share of the vote, and what share will that be?

In 1997 it was just 13 seats and I think John Major's Huntingdon had the highest share at 55%.

Nigelb

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

You should read what Twitter says about where he regularly spent the money, allegedly.
Also allegedly known to the whips.

Flatlander

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

ydoethur

Incidentally the Menzies scandal unearthed another one:

BBCR3 newsreaders can't pronounce names.

I've put up with weeks of Bin-jam-in Netanyahu.

Now they're referring to Mr Men-sies.

eek

LostPassword said:

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

1906. 156 seats out of 670. 23% of the seats, or 151 out of 650.

Thanks.

150 seats is looking like a great (but implausible ) result for the Tory party come the election

eek

TimS said:

Pulpstar said:

ydoethur said:

LostPassword said:

Sunak legacy is heading for him to be predominantly being the Tory leader who led them to a worse result since 1945

Should this read something like:

Sunak's legacy is looking likely to be leading the Tories to a result worse than 1945, perhaps their worst result since before the Great Reform Act of 1832.

1906 was their worst ever election result. Worse than any since 1783 before which party labels did not have much meaning.

If we are talking 1906, it is worth noting:

1) That remains the only peacetime election since 1885 where a party that had a landslide victory in its previous election suffered a landslide defeat;

2) It is to date the last election where the Leader of the Opposition became PM before calling the election;

3) In 1904 the Unionists had lost Oswestry in a by-election - the only time they had not held it from 1832 to 2021. (They won it back in 1906.)

Given the dual dominance (in terms of voting %, and seats stood) back then of the Liberals and Conservatives and the brutal decline of seats the Tories faced it's probably a good job for Sunak that the AV referendum never passed as whatever the Tory total is this time round my guess is giving over 2nd preferences would likely reduce it further still from what looks to be an already moribund total.

Not necessarily everywhere. I assume a lot of people putting Reform first choice would have Tory second.

I suspect a lot of people putting reform first are not actually going to go out and vote

jamesdoyle

I think we *need* the Tories to lose catastrophically badly. The Conservative brand is sill quite strong, and could survive a bad loss, but not a catastrophic one. But the likelhood now is that the Cons will move to the right when defeated, to some sort of Con/RefUK hybrid position. So if the brand survives the defeat, there could be enough loyalty to then propel that hybrid to a victory some way down the line. So a catastrophic loss would damage the brand enough that there would be no value for RefUK in that reverse takeover of the Consrvative party, and we'd be saved from the consequences.

Carnyx

Leon said:

Heathener said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Well you have all that with Reform. You may garner 10% at the election, 15% at most but you will have no seats. That kind of thinking, to which you are (currently) aligned will always sit out on the extreme in Britain.

By contrast there will always be a place for a centre-right low taxation AND socially caring party, which is sadly not where the current Conservative party have taken themselves with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country.

"with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country."

Please, can we not talk about Trans, again

You mean, necklaces?

Scott_xP

@benatipsos

More evidence of #change #Elections2024 - @Keir_Starmer now well ahead of
@RishiSunak on best Prime Minister rating. And the person in the lead normally wins.

eek

In other news I voted for the not Ben Houchen candidate now my postal vote has arrived

Carnyx

ydoethur said:

Incidentally the Menzies scandal unearthed another one:

BBCR3 newsreaders can't pronounce names.

I've put up with weeks of Bin-jam-in Netanyahu.

Now they're referring to Mr Men-sies.

Could be worse; imagine how references to Men of Harletsch would annoy you.

williamglenn

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

The mistake the Conservatives made in Canada was to try to pivot to the centre, which didn't work with centrists and left them exposed on their right flank. The Tories' best chance to avoid that is with a core vote strategy.

I mean, I would argue the problem the Tories have here is after years of feeding their base red meat the Tory base is so right wing they cannot be appeased, and so are likely to go to Reform / UKIP / whatever Farage vehicle turns up. A lurch to the centre (especially on culture war shit that just makes them look like weirdos to a lot of voters) I think would help more than hurt them.

What red meat? The country has been radically transformed by left-wing ideology while they've been in power.

Lol - radically changed by left-wing ideology? To live in your reality!

Increasing the temperature on immigration and asylum seekers, banning more and more protests, the increased persecution of trans people, the continued cutting to the bone of public services etc. etc.

Not to mention the dialing up of rhetoric from the Daily Mail (which is essentially the tail wagging the Tory dog) and GB News. Again - the Tories fed the right wing ecosystem but were found lacking (it seems by people like yourself) who seem to believe we live in some lefty utopia after over a decade of Tory led government. It's always more acceptable to shift the Overton window rightwards (because it serves the interests of capital to do so), so some people have fallen off the deep end.

Never mind the 'temperature', what about the numbers?

Leon

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

It's a scam which is becoming distressingly easy - and evermore effective. Microsoft have just revealed (released?) some voice cloning tech which is ASTONISHING. They can take a few moments of audio, and one photo, and turn it into an almost-entirely-convincing video of you - of anyone - saying what the "user" wants them to say. So you might get completely convincing VIDEO CALLS from, say, one of your children, begging for immediate money or they will die, and are you really going to say No? Are you going to wait and run the video through high-tech fake-detection software?

Honestly, it is terrifying in its implications

Peter_the_Punter

ydoethur said:

Incidentally the Menzies scandal unearthed another one:

BBCR3 newsreaders can't pronounce names.

I've put up with weeks of Bin-jam-in Netanyahu.

Now they're referring to Mr Men-sies.

Oh, there is one Beeb announcer who pronounces London in a way I have never heard before. The first syllable he rhymes with Ron, and the second with Don. Both syllables are given an equal heavy stress. It is as if he learned it from a book, having never heard an English person say it.

I used to think he had once taken elocution lessons but didn't finish the course, but I now suspect it is an affectation.

Nigelb

ydoethur said:

Incidentally the Menzies scandal unearthed another one:

BBCR3 newsreaders can't pronounce names.

I've put up with weeks of Bin-jam-in Netanyahu.

Now they're referring to Mr Men-sies.

That's a pretty rude homophone.

Leon

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Heathener said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Well you have all that with Reform. You may garner 10% at the election, 15% at most but you will have no seats. That kind of thinking, to which you are (currently) aligned will always sit out on the extreme in Britain.

By contrast there will always be a place for a centre-right low taxation AND socially caring party, which is sadly not where the current Conservative party have taken themselves with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country.

"with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country."

Please, can we not talk about Trans, again

You mean, necklaces?

I've noticed that she is wearing that necklace all the time now. So she clearly doesn't care that everyone now knows, because she really means it

eg it's in the "official" photo on her Wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Truss

Here in the Telegraph yesterday

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/non-fiction/ten-years-to-save-the-west-review-liz-truss-memoir/

Here in the Spec three days ago

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/revealed-five-revelations-from-trusss-first-book-interview/

I kind of admire her chutzpah, even if she was a disaster as PM. Which she absolutely was

williamglenn

Leon said:

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

It's a scam which is becoming distressingly easy - and evermore effective. Microsoft have just revealed (released?) some voice cloning tech which is ASTONISHING. They can take a few moments of audio, and one photo, and turn it into an almost-entirely-convincing video of you - of anyone - saying what the "user" wants them to say. So you might get completely convincing VIDEO CALLS from, say, one of your children, begging for immediate money or they will die, and are you really going to say No? Are you going to wait and run the video through high-tech fake-detection software?

Honestly, it is terrifying in its implications

It would be ironic if the technology gets so advanced that people start treating all electronic communications as suspect and revert to a pre-internet, or even pre-TV, mentality where everything that matters is done in person.

Nigelb

I hadn't realised this witness was still a senior PO lawyer.
Dealing with their victims.

Incredible.

..Former sub-postmaster Lee Castleton has called for Rodric Williams to be "removed" from the process of administering compensation.

Williams is currently a Head of Legal in the Post Office’s Remediation Unit. The remediation unit handles appeals from sub-postmasters, compensation and redress...

Leon

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

It's a scam which is becoming distressingly easy - and evermore effective. Microsoft have just revealed (released?) some voice cloning tech which is ASTONISHING. They can take a few moments of audio, and one photo, and turn it into an almost-entirely-convincing video of you - of anyone - saying what the "user" wants them to say. So you might get completely convincing VIDEO CALLS from, say, one of your children, begging for immediate money or they will die, and are you really going to say No? Are you going to wait and run the video through high-tech fake-detection software?

Honestly, it is terrifying in its implications

It would be ironic if the technology gets so advanced that people start treating all electronic communications as suspect and revert to a pre-internet, or even pre-TV, mentality where everything that matters is done in person.

That is possibly what will happen. It also means the end of WFH maybe? It certainly means the end of a lot of important stuff done over the phone or by video., you won't be able to trust it

But really, there are so many incredible implications of this tech - some dazzling some disastrous - it is impossible to really predict. It truly is an Event Horizon. the metaphor is beyond apt

Theuniondivvie

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

Wasn’t the corollary to the story that Menzies’ office repaid the money to the elderly person from party funds? Seems awfully generous of them if it was a scam (that is a scam by someone other than Menzies).

rcs1000

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

The last point is the most significant. No one with a brain would want to take over this car crash before the election. Which doesn't rule out Truss, of course.

PS, Robbed, I was, robbed.

There's a glitch in allowing first comments on new threads, happened with the morning thread as well.

@rcs1000 needs to investigate.

Yep: definitely the most important thing on my radar

boulay

Peter_the_Punter said:

ydoethur said:

Incidentally the Menzies scandal unearthed another one:

BBCR3 newsreaders can't pronounce names.

I've put up with weeks of Bin-jam-in Netanyahu.

Now they're referring to Mr Men-sies.

Oh, there is one Beeb announcer who pronounces London in a way I have never heard before. The first syllable he rhymes with Ron, and the second with Don. Both syllables are given an equal heavy stress. It is as if he learned it from a book, having never heard an English person say it.

I used to think he had once taken elocution lessons but didn't finish the course, but I now suspect it is an affectation.

Mishal Hussein always amuses me by pronouncing anywhere in the Middle East, Pakistan or Afghanistan with a beautiful exotic flourish and then lets the side down by pronouncing Paris as Pah-riss instead of Pareeee.

Just had a nice leg stretch and some natural vitamin D and it’s a beautiful afternoon.

rcs1000

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

It's a scam which is becoming distressingly easy - and evermore effective. Microsoft have just revealed (released?) some voice cloning tech which is ASTONISHING. They can take a few moments of audio, and one photo, and turn it into an almost-entirely-convincing video of you - of anyone - saying what the "user" wants them to say. So you might get completely convincing VIDEO CALLS from, say, one of your children, begging for immediate money or they will die, and are you really going to say No? Are you going to wait and run the video through high-tech fake-detection software?

Honestly, it is terrifying in its implications

It would be ironic if the technology gets so advanced that people start treating all electronic communications as suspect and revert to a pre-internet, or even pre-TV, mentality where everything that matters is done in person.

That is possibly what will happen. It also means the end of WFH maybe? It certainly means the end of a lot of important stuff done over the phone or by video., you won't be able to trust it

But really, there are so many incredible implications of this tech - some dazzling some disastrous - it is impossible to really predict. It truly is an Event Horizon. the metaphor is beyond apt

Yep:

And politics is going to become a complete cesspit of faked videos.

Nigelb

We have our first juror who has copped to following Truth Social posts by Trump.
https://twitter.com/TylerMcBrien/status/1780974443390448060

This is from the remaining pool, after more than half had been excused after answering no, when asked if they believed they could be impartial in deciding the case.

So honest, but thick.

DecrepiterJohnL

rcs1000 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

The last point is the most significant. No one with a brain would want to take over this car crash before the election. Which doesn't rule out Truss, of course.

PS, Robbed, I was, robbed.

There's a glitch in allowing first comments on new threads, happened with the morning thread as well.

@rcs1000 needs to investigate.

Yep: definitely the most important thing on my radar

The usual problem is new threads do not show up on Vanilla until at least one comment has been made via the classic www interface. This requires either TSE to say first, OGH test, or an insomniac happens to be up around 4am.

boulay

Theuniondivvie said:

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

Wasn’t the corollary to the story that Menzies’ office repaid the money to the elderly person from party funds? Seems awfully generous of them if it was a scam (that is a scam by someone other than Menzies).

A former colleague ran up a huge tab whilst pissed in a Geneva cabaret (a mix between a lap dance club and brothel they have there) and had to call me in the middle of the night to send him money otherwise he was going to be horribly beaten - I didn’t get repaid from company funds.

That’s the difference between someone being a drunken coked up prick and blowing money on things they shouldn’t be and someone being locked in a flat by bad people and needing urgent rescue when the police aren’t available by phone at that time of the morning.

Flatlander

Carnyx said:

ydoethur said:

Incidentally the Menzies scandal unearthed another one:

BBCR3 newsreaders can't pronounce names.

I've put up with weeks of Bin-jam-in Netanyahu.

Now they're referring to Mr Men-sies.

Could be worse; imagine how references to Men of Harletsch would annoy you.

Just to be awkward, some Menzies do call themselves Men-sies.

It could be worse. There is an alternative spelling of Minges (more common in the US).

Leon

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

It's a scam which is becoming distressingly easy - and evermore effective. Microsoft have just revealed (released?) some voice cloning tech which is ASTONISHING. They can take a few moments of audio, and one photo, and turn it into an almost-entirely-convincing video of you - of anyone - saying what the "user" wants them to say. So you might get completely convincing VIDEO CALLS from, say, one of your children, begging for immediate money or they will die, and are you really going to say No? Are you going to wait and run the video through high-tech fake-detection software?

Honestly, it is terrifying in its implications

It would be ironic if the technology gets so advanced that people start treating all electronic communications as suspect and revert to a pre-internet, or even pre-TV, mentality where everything that matters is done in person.

That is possibly what will happen. It also means the end of WFH maybe? It certainly means the end of a lot of important stuff done over the phone or by video., you won't be able to trust it

But really, there are so many incredible implications of this tech - some dazzling some disastrous - it is impossible to really predict. It truly is an Event Horizon. the metaphor is beyond apt

Yep:

And politics is going to become a complete cesspit of faked videos.

It absolutely is. Indeed politics might become impossible, as you won't be able to trust ANYTHING, any speeches, any broadcasts, any TV interviews, any TV debates, so how will they do it?

Here is that Microsoft Technology (you've probably seen it)

"VASA-1: Lifelike Audio-Driven Talking Faces Generated in Real Time"


"We introduce VASA, a framework for generating lifelike talking faces of virtual charactors with appealing visual affective skills (VAS), given a single static image and a speech audio clip."

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/vasa-1/

You can have fake newsreaders, fake actors, fake anyone-on-TV, you won't have to pay Gary Lineker £6m, you can take one photo of him and then AI-it, and sack the real Lineker

Honestly, you just need to look at these videos for a few moments, and extrapolate ahead two years, and.... fffffffuck

This is VASA 1. It is almost perfect, there are still some tiny glitches sometimes, when you do suspect, but wow. So now what will VASA 2 be like? Remember how images went from rubbish to flawless in one year

DecrepiterJohnL

Mark Menzies, Angela Rayner, all embarrassing stuff. Is it just me who thinks both are being used by an increasingly desperate CCHQ to cover up the William Wragg story which has national security implications and which has all but disappeared from the news?

boulay

Leon said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

It's a scam which is becoming distressingly easy - and evermore effective. Microsoft have just revealed (released?) some voice cloning tech which is ASTONISHING. They can take a few moments of audio, and one photo, and turn it into an almost-entirely-convincing video of you - of anyone - saying what the "user" wants them to say. So you might get completely convincing VIDEO CALLS from, say, one of your children, begging for immediate money or they will die, and are you really going to say No? Are you going to wait and run the video through high-tech fake-detection software?

Honestly, it is terrifying in its implications

It would be ironic if the technology gets so advanced that people start treating all electronic communications as suspect and revert to a pre-internet, or even pre-TV, mentality where everything that matters is done in person.

That is possibly what will happen. It also means the end of WFH maybe? It certainly means the end of a lot of important stuff done over the phone or by video., you won't be able to trust it

But really, there are so many incredible implications of this tech - some dazzling some disastrous - it is impossible to really predict. It truly is an Event Horizon. the metaphor is beyond apt

Yep:

And politics is going to become a complete cesspit of faked videos.

It absolutely is. Indeed politics might become impossible, as you won't be able to trust ANYTHING, any speeches, any broadcasts, any TV interviews, any TV debates, so how will they do it?

Here is that Microsoft Technology (you've probably seen it)

"VASA-1: Lifelike Audio-Driven Talking Faces Generated in Real Time"


"We introduce VASA, a framework for generating lifelike talking faces of virtual charactors with appealing visual affective skills (VAS), given a single static image and a speech audio clip."

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/vasa-1/

You can have fake newsreaders, fake actors, fake anyone-on-TV, you won't have to pay Gary Lineker £6m, you can take one photo of him and then AI-it, and sack the real Lineker

Honestly, you just need to look at these videos for a few moments, and extrapolate ahead two years, and.... fffffffuck

This is VASA 1. It is almost perfect, there are still some tiny glitches sometimes, when you do suspect, but wow. So now what will VASA 2 be like? Remember how images went from rubbish to flawless in one year

The upside, if you have a famous face and a very marketable or trusted public profile is that you could sell your image rights to AI programme makers to have you front their programme without you having to actually do any work.

So, for example, Fiona Bruce could do a load of TV programmes, some history documentary, a travel show and a politics review all in the same week without actually needing to leave the house.

Leon

DecrepiterJohnL said:

rcs1000 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

The last point is the most significant. No one with a brain would want to take over this car crash before the election. Which doesn't rule out Truss, of course.

PS, Robbed, I was, robbed.

There's a glitch in allowing first comments on new threads, happened with the morning thread as well.

@rcs1000 needs to investigate.

Yep: definitely the most important thing on my radar

The usual problem is new threads do not show up on Vanilla until at least one comment has been made via the classic www interface. This requires either TSE to say first, OGH test, or an insomniac happens to be up around 4am.

I tried to comment first but it wouldn't let me!

kjh

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Heathener said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Well you have all that with Reform. You may garner 10% at the election, 15% at most but you will have no seats. That kind of thinking, to which you are (currently) aligned will always sit out on the extreme in Britain.

By contrast there will always be a place for a centre-right low taxation AND socially caring party, which is sadly not where the current Conservative party have taken themselves with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country.

"with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country."

Please, can we not talk about Trans, again

You mean, necklaces?

I've noticed that she is wearing that necklace all the time now. So she clearly doesn't care that everyone now knows, because she really means it

eg it's in the "official" photo on her Wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Truss

Here in the Telegraph yesterday

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/non-fiction/ten-years-to-save-the-west-review-liz-truss-memoir/

Here in the Spec three days ago

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/revealed-five-revelations-from-trusss-first-book-interview/

I kind of admire her chutzpah, even if she was a disaster as PM. Which she absolutely was

Everyone doesn't know. Hardly anyone knows. I suspect most here only know because you told us the meaning of it. I have mentioned what you have posted to a few people and everyone I mention it to are gobsmacked and don't believe it and think it is a conspiracy, although I imagine they went home and googled it so it will spread. I appreciate we are looking at the wrong type of social media stuff, but that will be the case with most people surely.

I could be wrong, but I wonder how many people here would be aware if you hadn't said.

Leon

Something to cheer us all up

"Brussels proposes return to pre-Brexit free movement for UK and EU young people
European Commission to seek approval from leaders to start talks with UK on visa-free exchanges for 18- to 30-year-olds"

I never had a problem with FoM (I accept many did, and respect that choice)

So, from me, YAY

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/18/brussels-proposes-return-to-pre-brexit-free-movement-for-uk-and-eu-young-people?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Andy_JS

Leon said:

Something to cheer us all up

"Brussels proposes return to pre-Brexit free movement for UK and EU young people
European Commission to seek approval from leaders to start talks with UK on visa-free exchanges for 18- to 30-year-olds"

I never had a problem with FoM (I accept many did, and respect that choice)

So, from me, YAY

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/18/brussels-proposes-return-to-pre-brexit-free-movement-for-uk-and-eu-young-people?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Could be viewed as a political move to split UK opinion along age lines even more than it already is.

Leon

kjh said:

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Heathener said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Well you have all that with Reform. You may garner 10% at the election, 15% at most but you will have no seats. That kind of thinking, to which you are (currently) aligned will always sit out on the extreme in Britain.

By contrast there will always be a place for a centre-right low taxation AND socially caring party, which is sadly not where the current Conservative party have taken themselves with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country.

"with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country."

Please, can we not talk about Trans, again

You mean, necklaces?

I've noticed that she is wearing that necklace all the time now. So she clearly doesn't care that everyone now knows, because she really means it

eg it's in the "official" photo on her Wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Truss

Here in the Telegraph yesterday

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/non-fiction/ten-years-to-save-the-west-review-liz-truss-memoir/

Here in the Spec three days ago

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/revealed-five-revelations-from-trusss-first-book-interview/

I kind of admire her chutzpah, even if she was a disaster as PM. Which she absolutely was

Everyone doesn't know. Hardly anyone knows. I suspect most here only know because you told us the meaning of it. I have mentioned what you have posted to a few people and everyone I mention it to are gobsmacked and don't believe it and think it is a conspiracy, although I imagine they went home and googled it so it will spread. I appreciate we are looking at the wrong type of social media stuff, but that will be the case with most people surely.

I could be wrong, but I wonder how many people here would be aware if you hadn't said.

True. I am open to messages of gratitude

Big_G_NorthWales

Looking at politics and in particular the conservative party it is a complete embarrassment and a GE is urgent

There is no love for Starmer but if I had my way he would be installed in no 10 this summer so we can all move on

I do think Sunak is better than any other conservative option, I believe he is intelligent and doing the right thing economically for the country but he is terrible at politics

I would just add the SNP climb down on climate change targets is unexpected but inevitable and the future of EVs is in doubt with todays falling sales figures in Europe


https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Weak-EV-Market-Dragged-Down-European-Car-Sales-in-March.html#:~:text=In the EU, new electric,to 9,750 units last month.

TimS

boulay said:

Leon said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

It's a scam which is becoming distressingly easy - and evermore effective. Microsoft have just revealed (released?) some voice cloning tech which is ASTONISHING. They can take a few moments of audio, and one photo, and turn it into an almost-entirely-convincing video of you - of anyone - saying what the "user" wants them to say. So you might get completely convincing VIDEO CALLS from, say, one of your children, begging for immediate money or they will die, and are you really going to say No? Are you going to wait and run the video through high-tech fake-detection software?

Honestly, it is terrifying in its implications

It would be ironic if the technology gets so advanced that people start treating all electronic communications as suspect and revert to a pre-internet, or even pre-TV, mentality where everything that matters is done in person.

That is possibly what will happen. It also means the end of WFH maybe? It certainly means the end of a lot of important stuff done over the phone or by video., you won't be able to trust it

But really, there are so many incredible implications of this tech - some dazzling some disastrous - it is impossible to really predict. It truly is an Event Horizon. the metaphor is beyond apt

Yep:

And politics is going to become a complete cesspit of faked videos.

It absolutely is. Indeed politics might become impossible, as you won't be able to trust ANYTHING, any speeches, any broadcasts, any TV interviews, any TV debates, so how will they do it?

Here is that Microsoft Technology (you've probably seen it)

"VASA-1: Lifelike Audio-Driven Talking Faces Generated in Real Time"


"We introduce VASA, a framework for generating lifelike talking faces of virtual charactors with appealing visual affective skills (VAS), given a single static image and a speech audio clip."

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/vasa-1/

You can have fake newsreaders, fake actors, fake anyone-on-TV, you won't have to pay Gary Lineker £6m, you can take one photo of him and then AI-it, and sack the real Lineker

Honestly, you just need to look at these videos for a few moments, and extrapolate ahead two years, and.... fffffffuck

This is VASA 1. It is almost perfect, there are still some tiny glitches sometimes, when you do suspect, but wow. So now what will VASA 2 be like? Remember how images went from rubbish to flawless in one year

The upside, if you have a famous face and a very marketable or trusted public profile is that you could sell your image rights to AI programme makers to have you front their programme without you having to actually do any work.

So, for example, Fiona Bruce could do a load of TV programmes, some history documentary, a travel show and a politics review all in the same week without actually needing to leave the house.

The most obvious application for that is Attenborough’s voice. Instant immortality. He’d still be doing the voiceover for nature documentaries in 2150.

Leon

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Something to cheer us all up

"Brussels proposes return to pre-Brexit free movement for UK and EU young people
European Commission to seek approval from leaders to start talks with UK on visa-free exchanges for 18- to 30-year-olds"

I never had a problem with FoM (I accept many did, and respect that choice)

So, from me, YAY

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/18/brussels-proposes-return-to-pre-brexit-free-movement-for-uk-and-eu-young-people?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Could be viewed as a political move to split UK opinion along age lines even more than it already is.

Perhaps, but not from me. My BIGGEST regret about Brexit was the loss of FoM. It was the one thing that very nearly tipped me to Remain. I knew Brexit would be initially damaging and cost money, but I thought the gains in sovereignty and freedom from silly Brussels laws made it just about worth it

But if we can have Brexit AND FoM for young people? Yay. Then bring it in for everyone else. Sorted

Flatlander

TimS said:

boulay said:

Leon said:

rcs1000 said:

Leon said:

williamglenn said:

Leon said:

Flatlander said:

FF43 said:

'Mark Menzies called an elderly local party volunteer at 3.15 a.m. in December last year saying he was locked in a flat and needed £5,000 as a matter of “life and death.” '

These sleaze allegations are getting ever weirder. I mean Angela Rayner's hypothesised tax bill is rather ordinary in comparison.

That's a classic scam isn't it? Call an elderly person, pretend to be someone they know, say you need money urgently.

I'd be extremely surprised if it was actually him.

[Absent transaction logs, of course]

It's a scam which is becoming distressingly easy - and evermore effective. Microsoft have just revealed (released?) some voice cloning tech which is ASTONISHING. They can take a few moments of audio, and one photo, and turn it into an almost-entirely-convincing video of you - of anyone - saying what the "user" wants them to say. So you might get completely convincing VIDEO CALLS from, say, one of your children, begging for immediate money or they will die, and are you really going to say No? Are you going to wait and run the video through high-tech fake-detection software?

Honestly, it is terrifying in its implications

It would be ironic if the technology gets so advanced that people start treating all electronic communications as suspect and revert to a pre-internet, or even pre-TV, mentality where everything that matters is done in person.

That is possibly what will happen. It also means the end of WFH maybe? It certainly means the end of a lot of important stuff done over the phone or by video., you won't be able to trust it

But really, there are so many incredible implications of this tech - some dazzling some disastrous - it is impossible to really predict. It truly is an Event Horizon. the metaphor is beyond apt

Yep:

And politics is going to become a complete cesspit of faked videos.

It absolutely is. Indeed politics might become impossible, as you won't be able to trust ANYTHING, any speeches, any broadcasts, any TV interviews, any TV debates, so how will they do it?

Here is that Microsoft Technology (you've probably seen it)

"VASA-1: Lifelike Audio-Driven Talking Faces Generated in Real Time"


"We introduce VASA, a framework for generating lifelike talking faces of virtual charactors with appealing visual affective skills (VAS), given a single static image and a speech audio clip."

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/vasa-1/

You can have fake newsreaders, fake actors, fake anyone-on-TV, you won't have to pay Gary Lineker £6m, you can take one photo of him and then AI-it, and sack the real Lineker

Honestly, you just need to look at these videos for a few moments, and extrapolate ahead two years, and.... fffffffuck

This is VASA 1. It is almost perfect, there are still some tiny glitches sometimes, when you do suspect, but wow. So now what will VASA 2 be like? Remember how images went from rubbish to flawless in one year

The upside, if you have a famous face and a very marketable or trusted public profile is that you could sell your image rights to AI programme makers to have you front their programme without you having to actually do any work.

So, for example, Fiona Bruce could do a load of TV programmes, some history documentary, a travel show and a politics review all in the same week without actually needing to leave the house.

The most obvious application for that is Attenborough’s voice. Instant immortality. He’d still be doing the voiceover for nature documentaries in 2150.

Are you sure he isn't an AI already?

Most of the sounds in nature documentaries are fake.

kjh

Leon said:

kjh said:

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Heathener said:

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Well you have all that with Reform. You may garner 10% at the election, 15% at most but you will have no seats. That kind of thinking, to which you are (currently) aligned will always sit out on the extreme in Britain.

By contrast there will always be a place for a centre-right low taxation AND socially caring party, which is sadly not where the current Conservative party have taken themselves with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country.

"with their esoteric psychotic obsessions about things which are of little concern to the vast majority of this country."

Please, can we not talk about Trans, again

You mean, necklaces?

I've noticed that she is wearing that necklace all the time now. So she clearly doesn't care that everyone now knows, because she really means it

eg it's in the "official" photo on her Wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Truss

Here in the Telegraph yesterday

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/non-fiction/ten-years-to-save-the-west-review-liz-truss-memoir/

Here in the Spec three days ago

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/revealed-five-revelations-from-trusss-first-book-interview/

I kind of admire her chutzpah, even if she was a disaster as PM. Which she absolutely was

Everyone doesn't know. Hardly anyone knows. I suspect most here only know because you told us the meaning of it. I have mentioned what you have posted to a few people and everyone I mention it to are gobsmacked and don't believe it and think it is a conspiracy, although I imagine they went home and googled it so it will spread. I appreciate we are looking at the wrong type of social media stuff, but that will be the case with most people surely.

I could be wrong, but I wonder how many people here would be aware if you hadn't said.

True. I am open to messages of gratitude

Thank you. I always like to learn new things and PB never fails to deliver.

algarkirk

Leon said:

An asteroid is hurtling towartds the Tories. We could actually witness the death of the Conservative Party. If so: good. This country needs a proper right wing alternative to pallid , high tax, high spend social democracy with extra Wokeness, which is what Starmer and Sunak do and will provide

Millions of people would vote for a party of the centre right which was low tax, low spend, low debt, low borrowing, sane regulation, with added free speech, free trade, personal responsibility, sound defence, sound on the nature and role of the family and other small platoons, Burkean about change and respectful of our history and culture.

What we need urgently (if the Speccie could help here I might start reading it again) is a rigorous and costed programme of how we would get there, what would stay and what would go, the finances thereof and the political route to it.

Secondly this new party could do with a new name. Con, LD, Reform, Respect, Reclaim, UKIP, Brexit, and Change are all tainted by the failure to produce the 5 pages of A4 explaining how it is done in such a way as to both win an election and be successful.

For now the closest to this (though not very close) is called Labour.

Andy_JS

148grss said:

I'm surprised more people aren't looking at the Conservative collapse in Canada in 1993 as an analogy; going from 156 seats to 2 and having a massive voter realignment after bad economic conditions seems to fit quite well here. I don't think Tory seat numbers will fall that low, but they could be under 100, which would be extremely poor. And political parties rise and fall - and die. There is no reason to imagine the Conservatives are immune to that - they have arguably been in their death throes since Thatcher / Major (with New Labour just adopting a lot of Thatcherism, and the Tories only have brief moments of governing majorities since Major).

I don't think they'll go below 150, although that would still be their worst ever performance.