Stodge’s third and final look at the locals – politicalbetting.com

System

Stodge’s third and final look at the locals – politicalbetting.com

As we reach the final week of campaigning before the local elections next Thursday, time for a final look at some of the barometer councils where the results may not only set the immediate media tone but give a pointer as to the state of public opinion with an election within the next nine months.

Read the full story here

malcolmg

first

Scott_xP

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

RochdalePioneers

FPT but relevant

Mexicanpete said:

Heathener said:

Mexicanpete said:

MoonRabbit said:

Clutch_Brompton said:

MoonRabbit said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Stands Scotland where it did?
Alas, poor country almost afraid to know itself.

The second line adds much needed context to the first.

If you want context, there are those who believe every single Reform vote will head to the Conservatives at the first whiff of electoral gunpowder. A more realistic aim might be the 23% of 2019 Conservative voters who now back Reform - with the 2019 Conservative at 45%, 23% of that would be just over 10% of the entire electorate so you could see the Conservative vote share at 33% with Reform down to 3%.

The actual polling of Reform voters has suggested only a third would support the Conservatives absent a Reform candidate so that would push the Conservatives to the mid to upper 20s on tonight's polling.

In the 2021 PCC elections, the Conservatives led 44.5%-30% and won 30 with Labour winning 8.

On a straight 16% swing from Conservative to Labour, the Conservatives would hold just four. Turnout in 2021 was 34% - will be it any better on Thursday?

If you are referring to me, please use my name as the antagonist. I’m more than happy to debate this.

The polling breakdown of REF support you quoted is meaningless. Pollsters don’t predict, they just give you a snapshot. Not even MRP are prediction, just research that’s dating badly the moment it’s published.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when faced with a real choice. Pollsters have been feeding voters a smorgasbord of options that’s not avaivailble at the general election, unless you wish to waste your time and effort voting. First past the post ensures only Conservative or Labour wins the General Election, voters pick either Starmer or Sunak as Prime Minister - outside of that it’s Libdem to battle in 25 to 45 constituencies, Greens fighting in 2, every vote elsewhere voters will know its waste of time filling in the form, as it doesn’t count in the real election. First past the post creates this different forced choice election.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when the narrative changes - shift in just the 4 weeks of an election in defiance of real local elections votes mere weeks before. A July 4th election will be set against inflation under 2%, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth, and BOE announced interest rate cut and mortgage lenders responding - the credit crunch and Truss budget will be from a different time and place, years ago. Also thousands of Asylum Seekers have been rounded up into detention and planes taking off deporting them to Africa, with Ireland and the EU bleeting deterrents like this are just not playing fair, as they are now getting the immigrants once set on Britain.

Those are just the known knowns, relentlessly across media that will reshape the narrative in the six weeks till polling day. What’s unknown knowns is what dirt will be thrown at Labour front bench. Fact is, just footage of Starmer at a window holding a beer, reduced a 10 point labour lead down to just 4 points when relentlessly thrown at him daily in a campaign month two years ago. The unknown unknowns I ask you to consider, is impact on polls of Nigel Farage invited to join the Conservative Party, and stand for them as a Conservative candidate.

Secondly, I thank you Stodge for your fine headers on the Local Elections, where you have given us what to watch to calibrate what is good middling and bad night for each party. But what PNS and NEV will show us Labour underperforming the polling, what share figure shows them underperforming against the westminster polling, but still on cusp of a parliamentary majority? I found a NEV of 12% is the least Labour need to get this week to form a majority government - and even that figure is way beneath the swings in the polling. How do you understand it?

Local elections are not national elections. There is considerable polling evidence that the Cons nationally are remarkably more unpopular than local conservatives. There is a reason so many candidates choose to identify themselves as just that, 'Local Conservatives'. There is a reason Mayoral candidates have been distancing themselves from the dreaded C-word, even with the local branding.

Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one. Remember when the story broke and when the 'campaign' ended. Any impact was minimal at best. It was also something of a one-shot pistol. An aspect of the failure of the Rayner allegations to move the polls is that Currygate turned out to be, how should we say this, a load of bollocks.

Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE. Well, probably. However, not inevitably. I think Lab will have to make a major mistake and that is not impossible. However, to assume it will happen is to seriously under-estimate Starmer. He does not have to be brilliant he just has to be better than his opponent and at the moment that opponent seems very likely to be Mr Rishi Sunak.

Think on that - have you seen any evidence that Mr Sunak can maintain a credible election campaign? Can you imagine him facing a 'job interview' style grilling from a serious journalist? Can you imagine him in a debate with Starmer? To have a chance of closing the gap to any meaningful degree he willl have to do all of those and do them well.

In my many GEs I have only ever voted Lab once. I am no fan-boy for Starmer. However, their (not so) secret weapons are going to be front and centre throughout the GE campaign whenever it comes. Their names - Mr Rishi Sunak and the truly pathetic record of the current Govt.

We can all hope for miracles but they hardly ever come.

“Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one.”
The evidence absolutely supports me on that one. Go look, just 4% gap when it came to polling day.
It actually worked. By the end of the campaign Labour couldn’t get its message across for being asked by every media outfit about beergate.

“Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE.”
I am arguing they will close to just a 5 point gap without any swingback from Lab to Con, just reuniting of the centre right bloc.

Sunak is a drag on Tory polling, though maybe not ultimately huge drag on votes as you assume.
Sunak and Hunt will be thought of differently than last year, last month, last week and next week after a 6 week campaign built upon inflation under 2%, BOE interest rate cut, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth. The fact Labour have called the Rwanda policy so badly only accelerates that Ref to Con campaign period swingback.

You don’t understand do you? Just watch. watch it happen just like this.

You've come back madder than ever MarchMoonHare!

Up the Tories!

I thought they were spoofing the other day and I’m still not sure. No one can be reading the mood of the nation this badly can they?

The amount of Tory ramping on here at the moment does make one question the saliency of the polls. Are they reading the mood more appropriately than the polling would suggest they should?

I've always had the General Election as close and the boundaries, the voter suppression, the imported voters, the media narrative and the arithmetic could favour the Tories, but I may have to add to that the general idea that those who vote are rather content with the status quo. Perhaps we get an idea if they are right or not on Thursday. Anything under 300 council seat losses , Street and Houchen winning and Hall running Khan close will be a very good night for Sunak.

Its hopium: 'I am a Tory. What I believe is just. I am a good person. So I can't be that disconnected from what most people thing - the polls must be wrong.'

I understand hopium. I was full of it in 2015, thinking our Labour campaign in Stockton South had genuine hope of overturning the local scumbag Tory. Didn't get close - but then we won unexpectedly in 2017.

The Tories will find something to cling to on Thursday, and that thing may be the Lord Houchen of Teesport. Once Labour win the election and the NAO get at it, the fella has a limited future, but for a brief moment he will be the shining star which makes hopium sufferers believe in fairies that little bit harder.

LostPassword

Thanks Stodge. This is a useful guide.

Has it always been the case that the parties fail to stand a full slate of candidates for local elections, or is it something that has improved/deteriorated over the last couple of decades?

MattW

Fifth column - again.

LostPassword

We can tell that Britain has run out of (explosive) weapons to send to Ukraine - the Duchess of Edinburgh has been deployed to Ukraine instead.

Take that Putin.

Heathener

Mexicanpete said:

Heathener said:

Mexicanpete said:

MoonRabbit said:

Clutch_Brompton said:

MoonRabbit said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Stands Scotland where it did?
Alas, poor country almost afraid to know itself.

The second line adds much needed context to the first.

If you want context, there are those who believe every single Reform vote will head to the Conservatives at the first whiff of electoral gunpowder. A more realistic aim might be the 23% of 2019 Conservative voters who now back Reform - with the 2019 Conservative at 45%, 23% of that would be just over 10% of the entire electorate so you could see the Conservative vote share at 33% with Reform down to 3%.

The actual polling of Reform voters has suggested only a third would support the Conservatives absent a Reform candidate so that would push the Conservatives to the mid to upper 20s on tonight's polling.

In the 2021 PCC elections, the Conservatives led 44.5%-30% and won 30 with Labour winning 8.

On a straight 16% swing from Conservative to Labour, the Conservatives would hold just four. Turnout in 2021 was 34% - will be it any better on Thursday?

If you are referring to me, please use my name as the antagonist. I’m more than happy to debate this.

The polling breakdown of REF support you quoted is meaningless. Pollsters don’t predict, they just give you a snapshot. Not even MRP are prediction, just research that’s dating badly the moment it’s published.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when faced with a real choice. Pollsters have been feeding voters a smorgasbord of options that’s not avaivailble at the general election, unless you wish to waste your time and effort voting. First past the post ensures only Conservative or Labour wins the General Election, voters pick either Starmer or Sunak as Prime Minister - outside of that it’s Libdem to battle in 25 to 45 constituencies, Greens fighting in 2, every vote elsewhere voters will know its waste of time filling in the form, as it doesn’t count in the real election. First past the post creates this different forced choice election.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when the narrative changes - shift in just the 4 weeks of an election in defiance of real local elections votes mere weeks before. A July 4th election will be set against inflation under 2%, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth, and BOE announced interest rate cut and mortgage lenders responding - the credit crunch and Truss budget will be from a different time and place, years ago. Also thousands of Asylum Seekers have been rounded up into detention and planes taking off deporting them to Africa, with Ireland and the EU bleeting deterrents like this are just not playing fair, as they are now getting the immigrants once set on Britain.

Those are just the known knowns, relentlessly across media that will reshape the narrative in the six weeks till polling day. What’s unknown knowns is what dirt will be thrown at Labour front bench. Fact is, just footage of Starmer at a window holding a beer, reduced a 10 point labour lead down to just 4 points when relentlessly thrown at him daily in a campaign month two years ago. The unknown unknowns I ask you to consider, is impact on polls of Nigel Farage invited to join the Conservative Party, and stand for them as a Conservative candidate.

Secondly, I thank you Stodge for your fine headers on the Local Elections, where you have given us what to watch to calibrate what is good middling and bad night for each party. But what PNS and NEV will show us Labour underperforming the polling, what share figure shows them underperforming against the westminster polling, but still on cusp of a parliamentary majority? I found a NEV of 12% is the least Labour need to get this week to form a majority government - and even that figure is way beneath the swings in the polling. How do you understand it?

Local elections are not national elections. There is considerable polling evidence that the Cons nationally are remarkably more unpopular than local conservatives. There is a reason so many candidates choose to identify themselves as just that, 'Local Conservatives'. There is a reason Mayoral candidates have been distancing themselves from the dreaded C-word, even with the local branding.

Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one. Remember when the story broke and when the 'campaign' ended. Any impact was minimal at best. It was also something of a one-shot pistol. An aspect of the failure of the Rayner allegations to move the polls is that Currygate turned out to be, how should we say this, a load of bollocks.

Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE. Well, probably. However, not inevitably. I think Lab will have to make a major mistake and that is not impossible. However, to assume it will happen is to seriously under-estimate Starmer. He does not have to be brilliant he just has to be better than his opponent and at the moment that opponent seems very likely to be Mr Rishi Sunak.

Think on that - have you seen any evidence that Mr Sunak can maintain a credible election campaign? Can you imagine him facing a 'job interview' style grilling from a serious journalist? Can you imagine him in a debate with Starmer? To have a chance of closing the gap to any meaningful degree he willl have to do all of those and do them well.

In my many GEs I have only ever voted Lab once. I am no fan-boy for Starmer. However, their (not so) secret weapons are going to be front and centre throughout the GE campaign whenever it comes. Their names - Mr Rishi Sunak and the truly pathetic record of the current Govt.

We can all hope for miracles but they hardly ever come.

“Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one.”
The evidence absolutely supports me on that one. Go look, just 4% gap when it came to polling day.
It actually worked. By the end of the campaign Labour couldn’t get its message across for being asked by every media outfit about beergate.

“Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE.”
I am arguing they will close to just a 5 point gap without any swingback from Lab to Con, just reuniting of the centre right bloc.

Sunak is a drag on Tory polling, though maybe not ultimately huge drag on votes as you assume.
Sunak and Hunt will be thought of differently than last year, last month, last week and next week after a 6 week campaign built upon inflation under 2%, BOE interest rate cut, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth. The fact Labour have called the Rwanda policy so badly only accelerates that Ref to Con campaign period swingback.

You don’t understand do you? Just watch. watch it happen just like this.

You've come back madder than ever MarchMoonHare!

Up the Tories!

I thought they were spoofing the other day and I’m still not sure. No one can be reading the mood of the nation this badly can they?

The amount of Tory ramping on here at the moment does make one question the saliency of the polls. Are they reading the mood more appropriately than the polling would suggest they should?

I've always had the General Election as close and the boundaries, the voter suppression, the imported voters, the media narrative and the arithmetic could favour the Tories, but I may have to add to that the general idea that those who vote are rather content with the status quo. Perhaps we get an idea if they are right or not on Thursday. Anything under 300 council seat losses , Street and Houchen winning and Hall running Khan close will be a very good night for Sunak.

Interesting.

In one of my brief visits on here whilst away I mentioned that I thought that at the locals the national projected vote share of the tories may be 3-6% higher than it will be in the actual GE national equivalent, leading to false hope amongst some Conservatives. I base this on casual reflections from previous events and the fact that people do vote for local factors in, erm, local elections. And the full fury of the electorate won’t come swinging down on the tories until the one which matters.

It’s going to be interesting to analyse this. Probably not in the immediate rush because all sides will seize on the slightest morsel for comfort, and there will be something for everyone, but over the following days when the general picture should be a little clearer.

I do know from experience that it’s possible to be so wrapped inside one’s own cocoon that you can totally miss the real state of play.

carnforth

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Interesting. I assumed it would be the other way around.

Benpointer

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Benpointer

carnforth said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Interesting. I assumed it would be the other way around.

Hah! You've just doxxed yourself as not-a-senior-Tory-or-Labour-figure.

TOPPING

Great headers, @stodge. I mean obviously I didn't read any of them because life's too short to read about local elections but they are the very heart of PB so good effort.

megasaur

RochdalePioneers said:

FPT but relevant

Mexicanpete said:

Heathener said:

Mexicanpete said:

MoonRabbit said:

Clutch_Brompton said:

MoonRabbit said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Stands Scotland where it did?
Alas, poor country almost afraid to know itself.

The second line adds much needed context to the first.

If you want context, there are those who believe every single Reform vote will head to the Conservatives at the first whiff of electoral gunpowder. A more realistic aim might be the 23% of 2019 Conservative voters who now back Reform - with the 2019 Conservative at 45%, 23% of that would be just over 10% of the entire electorate so you could see the Conservative vote share at 33% with Reform down to 3%.

The actual polling of Reform voters has suggested only a third would support the Conservatives absent a Reform candidate so that would push the Conservatives to the mid to upper 20s on tonight's polling.

In the 2021 PCC elections, the Conservatives led 44.5%-30% and won 30 with Labour winning 8.

On a straight 16% swing from Conservative to Labour, the Conservatives would hold just four. Turnout in 2021 was 34% - will be it any better on Thursday?

If you are referring to me, please use my name as the antagonist. I’m more than happy to debate this.

The polling breakdown of REF support you quoted is meaningless. Pollsters don’t predict, they just give you a snapshot. Not even MRP are prediction, just research that’s dating badly the moment it’s published.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when faced with a real choice. Pollsters have been feeding voters a smorgasbord of options that’s not avaivailble at the general election, unless you wish to waste your time and effort voting. First past the post ensures only Conservative or Labour wins the General Election, voters pick either Starmer or Sunak as Prime Minister - outside of that it’s Libdem to battle in 25 to 45 constituencies, Greens fighting in 2, every vote elsewhere voters will know its waste of time filling in the form, as it doesn’t count in the real election. First past the post creates this different forced choice election.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when the narrative changes - shift in just the 4 weeks of an election in defiance of real local elections votes mere weeks before. A July 4th election will be set against inflation under 2%, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth, and BOE announced interest rate cut and mortgage lenders responding - the credit crunch and Truss budget will be from a different time and place, years ago. Also thousands of Asylum Seekers have been rounded up into detention and planes taking off deporting them to Africa, with Ireland and the EU bleeting deterrents like this are just not playing fair, as they are now getting the immigrants once set on Britain.

Those are just the known knowns, relentlessly across media that will reshape the narrative in the six weeks till polling day. What’s unknown knowns is what dirt will be thrown at Labour front bench. Fact is, just footage of Starmer at a window holding a beer, reduced a 10 point labour lead down to just 4 points when relentlessly thrown at him daily in a campaign month two years ago. The unknown unknowns I ask you to consider, is impact on polls of Nigel Farage invited to join the Conservative Party, and stand for them as a Conservative candidate.

Secondly, I thank you Stodge for your fine headers on the Local Elections, where you have given us what to watch to calibrate what is good middling and bad night for each party. But what PNS and NEV will show us Labour underperforming the polling, what share figure shows them underperforming against the westminster polling, but still on cusp of a parliamentary majority? I found a NEV of 12% is the least Labour need to get this week to form a majority government - and even that figure is way beneath the swings in the polling. How do you understand it?

Local elections are not national elections. There is considerable polling evidence that the Cons nationally are remarkably more unpopular than local conservatives. There is a reason so many candidates choose to identify themselves as just that, 'Local Conservatives'. There is a reason Mayoral candidates have been distancing themselves from the dreaded C-word, even with the local branding.

Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one. Remember when the story broke and when the 'campaign' ended. Any impact was minimal at best. It was also something of a one-shot pistol. An aspect of the failure of the Rayner allegations to move the polls is that Currygate turned out to be, how should we say this, a load of bollocks.

Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE. Well, probably. However, not inevitably. I think Lab will have to make a major mistake and that is not impossible. However, to assume it will happen is to seriously under-estimate Starmer. He does not have to be brilliant he just has to be better than his opponent and at the moment that opponent seems very likely to be Mr Rishi Sunak.

Think on that - have you seen any evidence that Mr Sunak can maintain a credible election campaign? Can you imagine him facing a 'job interview' style grilling from a serious journalist? Can you imagine him in a debate with Starmer? To have a chance of closing the gap to any meaningful degree he willl have to do all of those and do them well.

In my many GEs I have only ever voted Lab once. I am no fan-boy for Starmer. However, their (not so) secret weapons are going to be front and centre throughout the GE campaign whenever it comes. Their names - Mr Rishi Sunak and the truly pathetic record of the current Govt.

We can all hope for miracles but they hardly ever come.

“Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one.”
The evidence absolutely supports me on that one. Go look, just 4% gap when it came to polling day.
It actually worked. By the end of the campaign Labour couldn’t get its message across for being asked by every media outfit about beergate.

“Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE.”
I am arguing they will close to just a 5 point gap without any swingback from Lab to Con, just reuniting of the centre right bloc.

Sunak is a drag on Tory polling, though maybe not ultimately huge drag on votes as you assume.
Sunak and Hunt will be thought of differently than last year, last month, last week and next week after a 6 week campaign built upon inflation under 2%, BOE interest rate cut, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth. The fact Labour have called the Rwanda policy so badly only accelerates that Ref to Con campaign period swingback.

You don’t understand do you? Just watch. watch it happen just like this.

You've come back madder than ever MarchMoonHare!

Up the Tories!

I thought they were spoofing the other day and I’m still not sure. No one can be reading the mood of the nation this badly can they?

The amount of Tory ramping on here at the moment does make one question the saliency of the polls. Are they reading the mood more appropriately than the polling would suggest they should?

I've always had the General Election as close and the boundaries, the voter suppression, the imported voters, the media narrative and the arithmetic could favour the Tories, but I may have to add to that the general idea that those who vote are rather content with the status quo. Perhaps we get an idea if they are right or not on Thursday. Anything under 300 council seat losses , Street and Houchen winning and Hall running Khan close will be a very good night for Sunak.

Its hopium: 'I am a Tory. What I believe is just. I am a good person. So I can't be that disconnected from what most people thing - the polls must be wrong.'

I understand hopium. I was full of it in 2015, thinking our Labour campaign in Stockton South had genuine hope of overturning the local scumbag Tory. Didn't get close - but then we won unexpectedly in 2017.

The Tories will find something to cling to on Thursday, and that thing may be the Lord Houchen of Teesport. Once Labour win the election and the NAO get at it, the fella has a limited future, but for a brief moment he will be the shining star which makes hopium sufferers believe in fairies that little bit harder.

Not a Tory but I am thinking Ireland may offer Sunak an astonishingly elegant get out of jail card. Threat of Rwanda sends boat people to Ireland. Ireland has a long history of riots about immigrants. Their population is 5 million so if just 7% of channel crossers go on to Ireland they have proportionally the same problem as the UK. They can no more stop them at the border than we can because it doesn't physically exist, 270 roads cross it and the GFA pretty much prohibits policing it. They can legislate all they like about sending them back, but you can't legislate yourself the right to do that. Harris is 100% under the cosh and gets on the blower to Macron who suddenly thinks of effective ways to stop the boats at his end.

Stuartinromford

LostPassword said:

Thanks Stodge. This is a useful guide.

Has it always been the case that the parties fail to stand a full slate of candidates for local elections, or is it something that has improved/deteriorated over the last couple of decades?

Seconded on the thanks.

As to candidate slates, there have always been gaps due to local weakness of incompetence. The more interesting development has been tactical standowns. Say where 3 Conservatives are nominated for 3 seats, but 2 Labour and 1 Liberal, leaving the voters to work out what to do. Not a Sordid Deal, good heavens no, just how the nominations went

Don't recall that happening until fairly recently, but it can be brutally effective. Anyone know where and when it was tried first?

One of my rules for elections: the main determinant of seat numbers is how well or badly the parties in each bloc (LLG and RefCon) get on with each other.

OnlyLivingBoy

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

sbjme19

carnforth said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Interesting. I assumed it would be the other way around.

If the Tories are going to retain one, I'd much rather it were Street.

Scott_xP

...

LostPassword

These are the Tory shares in Redfield & Wilton polls in April:
21, 22, 20, 22
And for Labour:
44, 44, 43, 45
Make a trend out of that.

TOPPING

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

boulay

megasaur said:

RochdalePioneers said:

FPT but relevant

Mexicanpete said:

Heathener said:

Mexicanpete said:

MoonRabbit said:

Clutch_Brompton said:

MoonRabbit said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Stands Scotland where it did?
Alas, poor country almost afraid to know itself.

The second line adds much needed context to the first.

If you want context, there are those who believe every single Reform vote will head to the Conservatives at the first whiff of electoral gunpowder. A more realistic aim might be the 23% of 2019 Conservative voters who now back Reform - with the 2019 Conservative at 45%, 23% of that would be just over 10% of the entire electorate so you could see the Conservative vote share at 33% with Reform down to 3%.

The actual polling of Reform voters has suggested only a third would support the Conservatives absent a Reform candidate so that would push the Conservatives to the mid to upper 20s on tonight's polling.

In the 2021 PCC elections, the Conservatives led 44.5%-30% and won 30 with Labour winning 8.

On a straight 16% swing from Conservative to Labour, the Conservatives would hold just four. Turnout in 2021 was 34% - will be it any better on Thursday?

If you are referring to me, please use my name as the antagonist. I’m more than happy to debate this.

The polling breakdown of REF support you quoted is meaningless. Pollsters don’t predict, they just give you a snapshot. Not even MRP are prediction, just research that’s dating badly the moment it’s published.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when faced with a real choice. Pollsters have been feeding voters a smorgasbord of options that’s not avaivailble at the general election, unless you wish to waste your time and effort voting. First past the post ensures only Conservative or Labour wins the General Election, voters pick either Starmer or Sunak as Prime Minister - outside of that it’s Libdem to battle in 25 to 45 constituencies, Greens fighting in 2, every vote elsewhere voters will know its waste of time filling in the form, as it doesn’t count in the real election. First past the post creates this different forced choice election.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when the narrative changes - shift in just the 4 weeks of an election in defiance of real local elections votes mere weeks before. A July 4th election will be set against inflation under 2%, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth, and BOE announced interest rate cut and mortgage lenders responding - the credit crunch and Truss budget will be from a different time and place, years ago. Also thousands of Asylum Seekers have been rounded up into detention and planes taking off deporting them to Africa, with Ireland and the EU bleeting deterrents like this are just not playing fair, as they are now getting the immigrants once set on Britain.

Those are just the known knowns, relentlessly across media that will reshape the narrative in the six weeks till polling day. What’s unknown knowns is what dirt will be thrown at Labour front bench. Fact is, just footage of Starmer at a window holding a beer, reduced a 10 point labour lead down to just 4 points when relentlessly thrown at him daily in a campaign month two years ago. The unknown unknowns I ask you to consider, is impact on polls of Nigel Farage invited to join the Conservative Party, and stand for them as a Conservative candidate.

Secondly, I thank you Stodge for your fine headers on the Local Elections, where you have given us what to watch to calibrate what is good middling and bad night for each party. But what PNS and NEV will show us Labour underperforming the polling, what share figure shows them underperforming against the westminster polling, but still on cusp of a parliamentary majority? I found a NEV of 12% is the least Labour need to get this week to form a majority government - and even that figure is way beneath the swings in the polling. How do you understand it?

Local elections are not national elections. There is considerable polling evidence that the Cons nationally are remarkably more unpopular than local conservatives. There is a reason so many candidates choose to identify themselves as just that, 'Local Conservatives'. There is a reason Mayoral candidates have been distancing themselves from the dreaded C-word, even with the local branding.

Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one. Remember when the story broke and when the 'campaign' ended. Any impact was minimal at best. It was also something of a one-shot pistol. An aspect of the failure of the Rayner allegations to move the polls is that Currygate turned out to be, how should we say this, a load of bollocks.

Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE. Well, probably. However, not inevitably. I think Lab will have to make a major mistake and that is not impossible. However, to assume it will happen is to seriously under-estimate Starmer. He does not have to be brilliant he just has to be better than his opponent and at the moment that opponent seems very likely to be Mr Rishi Sunak.

Think on that - have you seen any evidence that Mr Sunak can maintain a credible election campaign? Can you imagine him facing a 'job interview' style grilling from a serious journalist? Can you imagine him in a debate with Starmer? To have a chance of closing the gap to any meaningful degree he willl have to do all of those and do them well.

In my many GEs I have only ever voted Lab once. I am no fan-boy for Starmer. However, their (not so) secret weapons are going to be front and centre throughout the GE campaign whenever it comes. Their names - Mr Rishi Sunak and the truly pathetic record of the current Govt.

We can all hope for miracles but they hardly ever come.

“Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one.”
The evidence absolutely supports me on that one. Go look, just 4% gap when it came to polling day.
It actually worked. By the end of the campaign Labour couldn’t get its message across for being asked by every media outfit about beergate.

“Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE.”
I am arguing they will close to just a 5 point gap without any swingback from Lab to Con, just reuniting of the centre right bloc.

Sunak is a drag on Tory polling, though maybe not ultimately huge drag on votes as you assume.
Sunak and Hunt will be thought of differently than last year, last month, last week and next week after a 6 week campaign built upon inflation under 2%, BOE interest rate cut, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth. The fact Labour have called the Rwanda policy so badly only accelerates that Ref to Con campaign period swingback.

You don’t understand do you? Just watch. watch it happen just like this.

You've come back madder than ever MarchMoonHare!

Up the Tories!

I thought they were spoofing the other day and I’m still not sure. No one can be reading the mood of the nation this badly can they?

The amount of Tory ramping on here at the moment does make one question the saliency of the polls. Are they reading the mood more appropriately than the polling would suggest they should?

I've always had the General Election as close and the boundaries, the voter suppression, the imported voters, the media narrative and the arithmetic could favour the Tories, but I may have to add to that the general idea that those who vote are rather content with the status quo. Perhaps we get an idea if they are right or not on Thursday. Anything under 300 council seat losses , Street and Houchen winning and Hall running Khan close will be a very good night for Sunak.

Its hopium: 'I am a Tory. What I believe is just. I am a good person. So I can't be that disconnected from what most people thing - the polls must be wrong.'

I understand hopium. I was full of it in 2015, thinking our Labour campaign in Stockton South had genuine hope of overturning the local scumbag Tory. Didn't get close - but then we won unexpectedly in 2017.

The Tories will find something to cling to on Thursday, and that thing may be the Lord Houchen of Teesport. Once Labour win the election and the NAO get at it, the fella has a limited future, but for a brief moment he will be the shining star which makes hopium sufferers believe in fairies that little bit harder.

Not a Tory but I am thinking Ireland may offer Sunak an astonishingly elegant get out of jail card. Threat of Rwanda sends boat people to Ireland. Ireland has a long history of riots about immigrants. Their population is 5 million so if just 7% of channel crossers go on to Ireland they have proportionally the same problem as the UK. They can no more stop them at the border than we can because it doesn't physically exist, 270 roads cross it and the GFA pretty much prohibits policing it. They can legislate all they like about sending them back, but you can't legislate yourself the right to do that. Harris is 100% under the cosh and gets on the blower to Macron who suddenly thinks of effective ways to stop the boats at his end.

I think it’s quite sweet that you think Macron will put Irish needs ahead of French preferences, EU solidarity only goes so far.

Ireland have a better chance if they pick up the phone to Big Joe Biden and remind him how Irish he is and get him to take the migrants, maybe send them to Texas. He is, after all, absolutely devoted to there being no border between north and south in Ireland and so will happily help with consequences.

Mexicanpete

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Conservative immigration thinking gets more desperate by the day.

Well the latest wizard wheeze from Gove to curb immigration is to close all the universities down. That'll do wonders for our balance of trade-not!

eek

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Half a £bn or £500m would have paid for a lot caseworkers to clear the backlog.

And it's that backlog that encourages people to come - if you claim was dealt with in 4 weeks and you were chucked out at the end you wouldn't risk it. Currently its 2 to 3 years by which point most immigrants have built up enough history to be qualify for residency...

ydoethur

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Conservative immigration thinking gets more desperate by the day.

Well the latest wizard wheeze from Gove to curb immigration is to close all the universities down. That'll do wonders for our balance of trade-not!

Ridiculous comment.

As if they're thinking.

Sandpit

LostPassword said:

We can tell that Britain has run out of (explosive) weapons to send to Ukraine - the Duchess of Edinburgh has been deployed to Ukraine instead.

Take that Putin.

The lovely Sophie has her place in the arsenal - as the tanks, ammunition, air defences, NLAW, HIMARS, and Storm Shadow, are all prepared for shipment.

TimS

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

Isn’t it more a simple case of starting point? Street won fairly narrowly and a moderate swing will see him gone. Houchen has a huge majority and could be safe even with a massive swing. Houchen could do substantially worse than Street on the night and still survive.

Jim_the_Lurker

sbjme19 said:

carnforth said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Interesting. I assumed it would be the other way around.

If the Tories are going to retain one, I'd much rather it were Street.

Indeed. If half of what has been written in Private Eye about the goings on in Teeside is true then the current mayor is 100% not fit for the position. Honestly, every time I read about it I am half expecting a body or two turn up and Brenda Blethyn to investigate.

DecrepiterJohnL

Top insights from outer London: I've seen only one poster in someone's window, and it was purple.

Scott_xP

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

malcolmg

first

eek said:

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Half a £bn or £500m would have paid for a lot caseworkers to clear the backlog.

And it's that backlog that encourages people to come - if you claim was dealt with in 4 weeks and you were chucked out at the end you wouldn't risk it. Currently its 2 to 3 years by which point most immigrants have built up enough history to be qualify for residency...

Yep, they should be on boat home within 2 weeks for sure or they go to Rwanda. French manage it much better.

Foxy

Thanks @Stodge. It's a shame though that local elections are mostly seen as a barometer of national voting intention. Largely due to the very limited powers of local government to do anything apart from declare bankruptcy I suppose.

I only get a supremely pointless PCC election to vote for. Isn't it time we abolished these?

eek

malcolmg said:

first

eek said:

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Half a £bn or £500m would have paid for a lot caseworkers to clear the backlog.

And it's that backlog that encourages people to come - if you claim was dealt with in 4 weeks and you were chucked out at the end you wouldn't risk it. Currently its 2 to 3 years by which point most immigrants have built up enough history to be qualify for residency...

Yep, they should be on boat home within 2 weeks for sure or they go to Rwanda. French manage it much better.

Given the number of people sat in Calais trying to get on a boat to the UK how do the French manage it better?

Theuniondivvie

LostPassword said:

We can tell that Britain has run out of (explosive) weapons to send to Ukraine - the Duchess of Edinburgh has been deployed to Ukraine instead.

Take that Putin.

If Ukraine needs tools to finish the job, I believe the Duke of York is available.

LostPassword

eek said:

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Half a £bn or £500m would have paid for a lot caseworkers to clear the backlog.

And it's that backlog that encourages people to come - if you claim was dealt with in 4 weeks and you were chucked out at the end you wouldn't risk it. Currently its 2 to 3 years by which point most immigrants have built up enough history to be qualify for residency...

The delay in processing cases is supposed to act as a deterrent. Years with no money, poor accommodation, threats of random bureaucracy upending everything. Periods of homelessness, forbidden to work, this is all supposed to create a hellish and Kafkaesque purgatory.

The problem with processing cases quickly is that, under the current rules, lots of people in the backlog, and arriving daily, would qualify for refugee status, and Britain would gain a reputation for fair dealing in respect of genuine refugees. And, under the current rules, at least a couple of hundred million people would qualify for refugee status in Britain.

No politician will try the fast processing option until they've changed the qualifying criteria so that Britain doesn't end up committed to finding homes for many millions of refugees.

kle4

Foxy said:

Thanks @Stodge. It's a shame though that local elections are mostly seen as a barometer of national voting intention. Largely due to the very limited powers of local government to do anything apart from declare bankruptcy I suppose.

I only get a supremely pointless PCC election to vote for. Isn't it time we abolished these?

If there were no Labour PCCs maybe that would happen, but since there are I can't see Keir doing it unfortunately.

Stuartinromford

TimS said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

Isn’t it more a simple case of starting point? Street won fairly narrowly and a moderate swing will see him gone. Houchen has a huge majority and could be safe even with a massive swing. Houchen could do substantially worse than Street on the night and still survive.

Problem with constituency based elections- not all constituencies are the same. And the fools and rogues will tend towards the safe seats for their party, because those are the only places that they can win.

You have to be good to win in a marginal, and that means that your career is at the mercy of a national swing.

kle4

Theuniondivvie said:

LostPassword said:

We can tell that Britain has run out of (explosive) weapons to send to Ukraine - the Duchess of Edinburgh has been deployed to Ukraine instead.

Take that Putin.

If Ukraine needs tools to finish the job, I believe the Duke of York is available.

There are rules about war crimes.

eek

In other news - if Rishi was hoping that interest rates were going to drop the major mortgage banks have just upped their rates.

A 5 year fixed that cost 4.28% in February is now 4.84%.. That's £5.60 extra a year for every £1000 borrowed.

TOPPING

TimS said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

Isn’t it more a simple case of starting point? Street won fairly narrowly and a moderate swing will see him gone. Houchen has a huge majority and could be safe even with a massive swing. Houchen could do substantially worse than Street on the night and still survive.

Yes it is. But this is the thinking that believes there are "safe" seats. Seats comprise the sum of the individuals who vote in it. Each is independent. If the offer from any particular party is sufficiently attractive then each individual may well vote for that party. The deepest Merseyside/Sussex Lab/Con "safe seat" could easily change.

kle4

Stuartinromford said:

TimS said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

Isn’t it more a simple case of starting point? Street won fairly narrowly and a moderate swing will see him gone. Houchen has a huge majority and could be safe even with a massive swing. Houchen could do substantially worse than Street on the night and still survive.

Problem with constituency based elections- not all constituencies are the same. And the fools and rogues will tend towards the safe seats for their party, because those are the only places that they can win.

You have to be good to win in a marginal, and that means that your career is at the mercy of a national swing.

Every year many good councillors lose seats due to national trends, it was ever thus.

It is easier at that level to get a personal vote to save yourself because it only takes a few hundred to a thousand votes to swing things, but it's much harder the higher up you go, even if you do a good job.

In fairness to Houchen his vote increased so much last time he's built himself a cushion. Sounds like he needs it.

eek

kle4 said:

Foxy said:

Thanks @Stodge. It's a shame though that local elections are mostly seen as a barometer of national voting intention. Largely due to the very limited powers of local government to do anything apart from declare bankruptcy I suppose.

I only get a supremely pointless PCC election to vote for. Isn't it time we abolished these?

If there were no Labour PCCs maybe that would happen, but since there are I can't see Keir doing it unfortunately.

A lot of Mayoralties also have the Police under their control. PCCs only exist where the Mayor region does not reflect the police force region.

For us that's great news because while I don't particularly like Ben Houchen I really wouldn't want my police force to be Cleveland Police...

Stuartinromford

eek said:

In other news - if Rishi was hoping that interest rates were going to drop the major mortgage banks have just upped their rates.

A 5 year fixed that cost 4.28% in February is now 4.84%.. That's £5.60 extra a year for every £1000 borrowed.

Fortunately for Rishi, most people are on fixed rates.

Unfortunately for Rishi, there is still a steady flow of people having to update their fixed rates from 1% to 5%.

kle4

TOPPING said:

TimS said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

Isn’t it more a simple case of starting point? Street won fairly narrowly and a moderate swing will see him gone. Houchen has a huge majority and could be safe even with a massive swing. Houchen could do substantially worse than Street on the night and still survive.

Yes it is. But this is the thinking that believes there are "safe" seats. Seats comprise the sum of the individuals who vote in it. Each is independent. If the offer from any particular party is sufficiently attractive then each individual may well vote for that party. The deepest Merseyside/Sussex Lab/Con "safe seat" could easily change.

Not easily. But it can be done and parties have to keep trying and plugging away. Eventually they can break through.

Foxy

LostPassword said:

eek said:

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Half a £bn or £500m would have paid for a lot caseworkers to clear the backlog.

And it's that backlog that encourages people to come - if you claim was dealt with in 4 weeks and you were chucked out at the end you wouldn't risk it. Currently its 2 to 3 years by which point most immigrants have built up enough history to be qualify for residency...

The delay in processing cases is supposed to act as a deterrent. Years with no money, poor accommodation, threats of random bureaucracy upending everything. Periods of homelessness, forbidden to work, this is all supposed to create a hellish and Kafkaesque purgatory.

The problem with processing cases quickly is that, under the current rules, lots of people in the backlog, and arriving daily, would qualify for refugee status, and Britain would gain a reputation for fair dealing in respect of genuine refugees. And, under the current rules, at least a couple of hundred million people would qualify for refugee status in Britain.

No politician will try the fast processing option until they've changed the qualifying criteria so that Britain doesn't end up committed to finding homes for many millions of refugees.

Though the all party group thinks deterrence via incompetent bureaucracy doesn't work.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/30/asylum-seekers-uk-right-work-six-months-public-services-cross-party-report

Mexicanpete

Stuartinromford said:

eek said:

In other news - if Rishi was hoping that interest rates were going to drop the major mortgage banks have just upped their rates.

A 5 year fixed that cost 4.28% in February is now 4.84%.. That's £5.60 extra a year for every £1000 borrowed.

Fortunately for Rishi, most people are on fixed rates.

Unfortunately for Rishi, there is still a steady flow of people having to update their fixed rates from 1% to 5%.

But, but Rwanda....

kle4

Foxy said:

LostPassword said:

eek said:

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Half a £bn or £500m would have paid for a lot caseworkers to clear the backlog.

And it's that backlog that encourages people to come - if you claim was dealt with in 4 weeks and you were chucked out at the end you wouldn't risk it. Currently its 2 to 3 years by which point most immigrants have built up enough history to be qualify for residency...

The delay in processing cases is supposed to act as a deterrent. Years with no money, poor accommodation, threats of random bureaucracy upending everything. Periods of homelessness, forbidden to work, this is all supposed to create a hellish and Kafkaesque purgatory.

The problem with processing cases quickly is that, under the current rules, lots of people in the backlog, and arriving daily, would qualify for refugee status, and Britain would gain a reputation for fair dealing in respect of genuine refugees. And, under the current rules, at least a couple of hundred million people would qualify for refugee status in Britain.

No politician will try the fast processing option until they've changed the qualifying criteria so that Britain doesn't end up committed to finding homes for many millions of refugees.

Though the all party group thinks deterrence via incompetent bureaucracy doesn't work.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/30/asylum-seekers-uk-right-work-six-months-public-services-cross-party-report

Works for low stakes stuff, not things like this.

IanB2

TOPPING said:

TimS said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

Isn’t it more a simple case of starting point? Street won fairly narrowly and a moderate swing will see him gone. Houchen has a huge majority and could be safe even with a massive swing. Houchen could do substantially worse than Street on the night and still survive.

Yes it is. But this is the thinking that believes there are "safe" seats. Seats comprise the sum of the individuals who vote in it. Each is independent. If the offer from any particular party is sufficiently attractive then each individual may well vote for that party. The deepest Merseyside/Sussex Lab/Con "safe seat" could easily change.

Fact remains that there are large parts of the country where voters would rather have an idiot elected provided it’s their sort of idiot. Hence we find ourselves represented by rather a lot of idiots, of all sorts.

Scott_xP

@HTScotPol

Ian Blackford setting a hare running on GMS by being unclear about whether John Swinney, if FM, would stand for re-election in 2026.

If Swinney can't commit to standing again he'd be an instant lame duck

Sandpit

Stuartinromford said:

eek said:

In other news - if Rishi was hoping that interest rates were going to drop the major mortgage banks have just upped their rates.

A 5 year fixed that cost 4.28% in February is now 4.84%.. That's £5.60 extra a year for every £1000 borrowed.

Fortunately for Rishi, most people are on fixed rates.

Unfortunately for Rishi, there is still a steady flow of people having to update their fixed rates from 1% to 5%.

Some of us have been pointing out this one for ages now, that every month there’s 100k mortgages renewed. So in the six months between May and November, over a million adults will likely be directly impacted, and many more indirectly impacted (adult children, dependent parents) by MASSIVELY rising interest rates, irrespective of whether or not tha Bank cuts a quarter point over the summer.

Ratters

eek said:

In other news - if Rishi was hoping that interest rates were going to drop the major mortgage banks have just upped their rates.

A 5 year fixed that cost 4.28% in February is now 4.84%.. That's £5.60 extra a year for every £1000 borrowed.

Yes I saw this. Very much against the hoped narrative of falling inflation and interest rates. And 2-year fixes, currently popular given the hope of rates falling back, are even higher.

Ultimately the changes are noise in the context of people coming off 2-year or 5-year fixes and finding their mortgage rate doubled or tripled or more. There's no one coming up for renewal thinking 'oh yes these rates are good, thank you Rishi'.

Of course current rates have absolutely nothing to do with Truss but the Tories are still getting a decent proportion of the blame.

Foxy

Meanwhile, the DHSC has managed to create an employment crisis for GPs at the same time as one over access to GP appointments. Truly extraordinary incompetence:

https://twitter.com/pulsetoday/status/1784930899416490311?t=G2R9ao0O_ui2vcgdBibUPg&s=19

TimS

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

Scott_xP

@iainmartin1

After the last ten years, listening to the SNP ask for a reset and for everyone - all the other parties - to start being nice to each other and work with the SNP is… hilarious.

@RobDotHutton

The wisdom and accidental wit of Humza Yousaf.

Scott_xP

@HolyroodSources

Gillian Mackay (Green MSP): "We do have confidence in the Government as a whole."

@akmaciver: What if the leadership contest indications were leaning more towards Kate Forbes?

Gillian: "I suppose I should say it's confidence in this Government as it currently is."

kjh

Thank you @stodge and @HYUFD . Very interesting on areas I know nothing about.

DecrepiterJohnL

Foxy said:

Meanwhile, the DHSC has managed to create an employment crisis for GPs at the same time as one over access to GP appointments. Truly extraordinary incompetence:

https://twitter.com/pulsetoday/status/1784930899416490311?t=G2R9ao0O_ui2vcgdBibUPg&s=19

The Twix thread mentions increased payments for PAs and the like but possibly another reason is the increase in part-time GPs in many practices. If you need a week's cover and have half-a-dozen part-timers, it might be easier for them to absorb the extra shifts. But if this is a sudden change then it probably is the government fiddling with the rates.

ETA of course, cynical GP partners might just be letting the waiting list buffer the strain.

Theuniondivvie

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News for £s?

StillWaters

kle4 said:

Foxy said:

Thanks @Stodge. It's a shame though that local elections are mostly seen as a barometer of national voting intention. Largely due to the very limited powers of local government to do anything apart from declare bankruptcy I suppose.

I only get a supremely pointless PCC election to vote for. Isn't it time we abolished these?

If there were no Labour PCCs maybe that would happen, but since there are I can't see Keir doing it unfortunately.

The logic behind PCCs was that you need someone to set strategic priorities for the police and ensure oversight. That body needs to be democratically accountable.

Prior to PCCs you had police authorities which were notoriously corrupt and suffered from regulatory capture by the police (they were nominated by local councillors).

Combining the PCC with the elected mayor position makes sense but you also need a solution for those parts of the country where there are no mayors

Cookie

eek said:

malcolmg said:

first

eek said:

Benpointer said:

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

MoonRabbit said:

MaxPB said:

Scott_xP said:

Leon said:

If Rwanda WORKS

It won't.

7000 have already gone to Ireland. It's already working.

All the 7000 because of Rwanda scheme?

We can’t have a proper debate here if you are going to say silly things like that.

Irish politicians have a problem, their voters really don’t like these immigrants, and it’s an election year there too, so are happy to scapegoat London for the problem to take the heat off themselves, whilst London is more than happy for their policy to get the blame for the scenes in Ireland. It’s a bizarre diplomatic row between governments who share exactly the same hymn sheet! Voters in both countries are the poorer for this if you genuine believe all those 7000 are there because of Rwanda policy. Lawyers working with migrants in Ireland are only seeing a small uptick because of Rwanda - and even then your mind appears closed to how someone gaming the system might just be saying whatever they think helps their case.

https://www.channel4.com/news/how-is-the-uks-rwanda-asylum-plan-impacting-ireland

https://www.channel4.com/news/rwanda-effect-on-asylum-seeker-numbers-doubtful-says-irish-mep

Certainly Labours mistake in calling it nothing more than a gimmick, has quickly dated very badly. pledging to bin the scheme on day 1, wasting all the time and costs getting here as it’s binned despite being unproven the scheme has failed and won’t work, is actually building this into a huge General Election vote winner for the conservatives. Truth is, in the minds eye of every voter they can see the Tories magic bullet to stop illegal migration, but they can’t see Labours. If Labour are taking 5 minutes to explain why the Rwanda Policy won’t work to justify why they are junking it, and a further 5 minutes to explain what they will do differently and why it will deliver better results, then Labour have already lost the General Election argument on this one.

I suspect actual boat numbers through the summer will make Labour's argument for them.

Unless we have a July election of course!

And what is Labour's argument? What do they plan to do about it?

Oh, that's right - nothing.

Nope. Labour's plan is quite clear, it is to cooperate with our neighbours, take a quota of asylum seekers in exchange for being able to return people who cross the Channel, spend more on asylum caseworkers to help clear the c.200k backlog of those awaiting an initial decision on their application.

I'd like to see them go further: e.g. allow/make asylum-seekers work to pay for their keep, encourage illegal immigrants to shop employers in return for a route to citizenship, introduce ID cards, tighten up legal immigration which of course swamps illegal by some margin. These and similar would fuel a right-wing media frenzy so I can't blame Labour for keeping them off the agenda at present.

Labour has a plan but you'd rather see this end-of-life Tory shambles spaff money up the wall on a scheme that is as unworkable as it is cruel. Half a £bn is it so far?

Half a £bn or £500m would have paid for a lot caseworkers to clear the backlog.

And it's that backlog that encourages people to come - if you claim was dealt with in 4 weeks and you were chucked out at the end you wouldn't risk it. Currently its 2 to 3 years by which point most immigrants have built up enough history to be qualify for residency...

Yep, they should be on boat home within 2 weeks for sure or they go to Rwanda. French manage it much better.

Given the number of people sat in Calais trying to get on a boat to the UK how do the French manage it better?

By sending them here!

eek

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News?

Does he want to travel round the country and really screw up the Tory party or continue to be on GBNews every night setting the agenda and really screwing up the Tory party.

I can see why it's difficult because it's hard to work out which option screws Rishi and co up more....

kjh

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

It is difficult to tell isn't it, if you are directly involved. I get a lot, but it does mostly look like stuff I am getting because I am a member. I have no idea what others are getting.

In Guildford the LDs are working very hard, even though they don't have locals, with teams out everyday and regular big action days. Again this looks like a lot of effort to me, but when diluted over the whole constituency does it look like a lot to the general public?

nico679

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News for £s?

We can hardly wait . How will we contain our excitement !

TimS

TOPPING said:

TimS said:

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

Isn’t it more a simple case of starting point? Street won fairly narrowly and a moderate swing will see him gone. Houchen has a huge majority and could be safe even with a massive swing. Houchen could do substantially worse than Street on the night and still survive.

Yes it is. But this is the thinking that believes there are "safe" seats. Seats comprise the sum of the individuals who vote in it. Each is independent. If the offer from any particular party is sufficiently attractive then each individual may well vote for that party. The deepest Merseyside/Sussex Lab/Con "safe seat" could easily change.

Simple fix for that. Have the government legislate that Teesside is safe for Houchen in perpetuity. It might spend a bit of time in ping pong with the Lords but eventually it'll get through. Let's not allow a foreign court to dictate who can be our Teesside mayor.

OnlyLivingBoy

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

I guess I am.

Carnyx

megasaur said:

RochdalePioneers said:

FPT but relevant

Mexicanpete said:

Heathener said:

Mexicanpete said:

MoonRabbit said:

Clutch_Brompton said:

MoonRabbit said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Stands Scotland where it did?
Alas, poor country almost afraid to know itself.

The second line adds much needed context to the first.

If you want context, there are those who believe every single Reform vote will head to the Conservatives at the first whiff of electoral gunpowder. A more realistic aim might be the 23% of 2019 Conservative voters who now back Reform - with the 2019 Conservative at 45%, 23% of that would be just over 10% of the entire electorate so you could see the Conservative vote share at 33% with Reform down to 3%.

The actual polling of Reform voters has suggested only a third would support the Conservatives absent a Reform candidate so that would push the Conservatives to the mid to upper 20s on tonight's polling.

In the 2021 PCC elections, the Conservatives led 44.5%-30% and won 30 with Labour winning 8.

On a straight 16% swing from Conservative to Labour, the Conservatives would hold just four. Turnout in 2021 was 34% - will be it any better on Thursday?

If you are referring to me, please use my name as the antagonist. I’m more than happy to debate this.

The polling breakdown of REF support you quoted is meaningless. Pollsters don’t predict, they just give you a snapshot. Not even MRP are prediction, just research that’s dating badly the moment it’s published.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when faced with a real choice. Pollsters have been feeding voters a smorgasbord of options that’s not avaivailble at the general election, unless you wish to waste your time and effort voting. First past the post ensures only Conservative or Labour wins the General Election, voters pick either Starmer or Sunak as Prime Minister - outside of that it’s Libdem to battle in 25 to 45 constituencies, Greens fighting in 2, every vote elsewhere voters will know its waste of time filling in the form, as it doesn’t count in the real election. First past the post creates this different forced choice election.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when the narrative changes - shift in just the 4 weeks of an election in defiance of real local elections votes mere weeks before. A July 4th election will be set against inflation under 2%, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth, and BOE announced interest rate cut and mortgage lenders responding - the credit crunch and Truss budget will be from a different time and place, years ago. Also thousands of Asylum Seekers have been rounded up into detention and planes taking off deporting them to Africa, with Ireland and the EU bleeting deterrents like this are just not playing fair, as they are now getting the immigrants once set on Britain.

Those are just the known knowns, relentlessly across media that will reshape the narrative in the six weeks till polling day. What’s unknown knowns is what dirt will be thrown at Labour front bench. Fact is, just footage of Starmer at a window holding a beer, reduced a 10 point labour lead down to just 4 points when relentlessly thrown at him daily in a campaign month two years ago. The unknown unknowns I ask you to consider, is impact on polls of Nigel Farage invited to join the Conservative Party, and stand for them as a Conservative candidate.

Secondly, I thank you Stodge for your fine headers on the Local Elections, where you have given us what to watch to calibrate what is good middling and bad night for each party. But what PNS and NEV will show us Labour underperforming the polling, what share figure shows them underperforming against the westminster polling, but still on cusp of a parliamentary majority? I found a NEV of 12% is the least Labour need to get this week to form a majority government - and even that figure is way beneath the swings in the polling. How do you understand it?

Local elections are not national elections. There is considerable polling evidence that the Cons nationally are remarkably more unpopular than local conservatives. There is a reason so many candidates choose to identify themselves as just that, 'Local Conservatives'. There is a reason Mayoral candidates have been distancing themselves from the dreaded C-word, even with the local branding.

Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one. Remember when the story broke and when the 'campaign' ended. Any impact was minimal at best. It was also something of a one-shot pistol. An aspect of the failure of the Rayner allegations to move the polls is that Currygate turned out to be, how should we say this, a load of bollocks.

Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE. Well, probably. However, not inevitably. I think Lab will have to make a major mistake and that is not impossible. However, to assume it will happen is to seriously under-estimate Starmer. He does not have to be brilliant he just has to be better than his opponent and at the moment that opponent seems very likely to be Mr Rishi Sunak.

Think on that - have you seen any evidence that Mr Sunak can maintain a credible election campaign? Can you imagine him facing a 'job interview' style grilling from a serious journalist? Can you imagine him in a debate with Starmer? To have a chance of closing the gap to any meaningful degree he willl have to do all of those and do them well.

In my many GEs I have only ever voted Lab once. I am no fan-boy for Starmer. However, their (not so) secret weapons are going to be front and centre throughout the GE campaign whenever it comes. Their names - Mr Rishi Sunak and the truly pathetic record of the current Govt.

We can all hope for miracles but they hardly ever come.

“Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one.”
The evidence absolutely supports me on that one. Go look, just 4% gap when it came to polling day.
It actually worked. By the end of the campaign Labour couldn’t get its message across for being asked by every media outfit about beergate.

“Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE.”
I am arguing they will close to just a 5 point gap without any swingback from Lab to Con, just reuniting of the centre right bloc.

Sunak is a drag on Tory polling, though maybe not ultimately huge drag on votes as you assume.
Sunak and Hunt will be thought of differently than last year, last month, last week and next week after a 6 week campaign built upon inflation under 2%, BOE interest rate cut, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth. The fact Labour have called the Rwanda policy so badly only accelerates that Ref to Con campaign period swingback.

You don’t understand do you? Just watch. watch it happen just like this.

You've come back madder than ever MarchMoonHare!

Up the Tories!

I thought they were spoofing the other day and I’m still not sure. No one can be reading the mood of the nation this badly can they?

The amount of Tory ramping on here at the moment does make one question the saliency of the polls. Are they reading the mood more appropriately than the polling would suggest they should?

I've always had the General Election as close and the boundaries, the voter suppression, the imported voters, the media narrative and the arithmetic could favour the Tories, but I may have to add to that the general idea that those who vote are rather content with the status quo. Perhaps we get an idea if they are right or not on Thursday. Anything under 300 council seat losses , Street and Houchen winning and Hall running Khan close will be a very good night for Sunak.

Its hopium: 'I am a Tory. What I believe is just. I am a good person. So I can't be that disconnected from what most people thing - the polls must be wrong.'

I understand hopium. I was full of it in 2015, thinking our Labour campaign in Stockton South had genuine hope of overturning the local scumbag Tory. Didn't get close - but then we won unexpectedly in 2017.

The Tories will find something to cling to on Thursday, and that thing may be the Lord Houchen of Teesport. Once Labour win the election and the NAO get at it, the fella has a limited future, but for a brief moment he will be the shining star which makes hopium sufferers believe in fairies that little bit harder.

Not a Tory but I am thinking Ireland may offer Sunak an astonishingly elegant get out of jail card. Threat of Rwanda sends boat people to Ireland. Ireland has a long history of riots about immigrants. Their population is 5 million so if just 7% of channel crossers go on to Ireland they have proportionally the same problem as the UK. They can no more stop them at the border than we can because it doesn't physically exist, 270 roads cross it and the GFA pretty much prohibits policing it. They can legislate all they like about sending them back, but you can't legislate yourself the right to do that. Harris is 100% under the cosh and gets on the blower to Macron who suddenly thinks of effective ways to stop the boats at his end.

But that means 93% of channel crossers* have remained in the UK - instantly saturating the Rwandan option. And wrecking it. So no need to go to Ireland ...

*Not the only illegal immigrants, of course, either.

TimS

kjh said:

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

It is difficult to tell isn't it, if you are directly involved. I get a lot, but it does mostly look like stuff I am getting because I am a member. I have no idea what others are getting.

In Guildford the LDs are working very hard, even though they don't have locals, with teams out everyday and regular big action days. Again this looks like a lot of effort to me, but when diluted over the whole constituency does it look like a lot to the general public?

I think we may be seeing something of the change in tactics after the failure of 2019. There the focus was on the air war and a national strategy. Now we're going in the opposite direction with hyper-targeted, hyper-local campaigning. I do worry this is a bit of an over correction. It means people not in Lib Dem targets or in the core target demographic see almost nothing of the party (not helped by complete press disinterest) and that helps to feed a "Davey is invisible" narrative. See PB for evidence of this.

We are badly in need of elections. Parliamentary byelections where LDs are the main challengers are the gold standard, but locals will do nicely too. The Euros used to be another opportunity but they have been cruelly wrested from our grasp by Brexit. Ironically the one type of election that UKIP and its descendants always excelled at.

kjh

TOPPING said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@jessicaelgot

Both Lab and Tories have done some expectations management on West Midlands and Teeside mayoralties - briefing how they expect the other side to win. In reality, senior figures on both sides believe Labour will win West Mids and Tories will hold Teeside.

Obviously I'd like Labour to win both. But if Street - who by all accounts is a decent guy doing a reasonable job - loses while Houchen - who has a cloud of scandal that looks quite substantive over his head - holds on then it isn't a great reflection on the health of local democracy.

Rubbish. It is the very essence of local democracy. Are you saying that the voters will likely "get it wrong"?

I find the voters usually get it wrong, but then I am biased.

TimS

Carnyx said:

megasaur said:

RochdalePioneers said:

FPT but relevant

Mexicanpete said:

Heathener said:

Mexicanpete said:

MoonRabbit said:

Clutch_Brompton said:

MoonRabbit said:

stodge said:

Evening all

Stands Scotland where it did?
Alas, poor country almost afraid to know itself.

The second line adds much needed context to the first.

If you want context, there are those who believe every single Reform vote will head to the Conservatives at the first whiff of electoral gunpowder. A more realistic aim might be the 23% of 2019 Conservative voters who now back Reform - with the 2019 Conservative at 45%, 23% of that would be just over 10% of the entire electorate so you could see the Conservative vote share at 33% with Reform down to 3%.

The actual polling of Reform voters has suggested only a third would support the Conservatives absent a Reform candidate so that would push the Conservatives to the mid to upper 20s on tonight's polling.

In the 2021 PCC elections, the Conservatives led 44.5%-30% and won 30 with Labour winning 8.

On a straight 16% swing from Conservative to Labour, the Conservatives would hold just four. Turnout in 2021 was 34% - will be it any better on Thursday?

If you are referring to me, please use my name as the antagonist. I’m more than happy to debate this.

The polling breakdown of REF support you quoted is meaningless. Pollsters don’t predict, they just give you a snapshot. Not even MRP are prediction, just research that’s dating badly the moment it’s published.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when faced with a real choice. Pollsters have been feeding voters a smorgasbord of options that’s not avaivailble at the general election, unless you wish to waste your time and effort voting. First past the post ensures only Conservative or Labour wins the General Election, voters pick either Starmer or Sunak as Prime Minister - outside of that it’s Libdem to battle in 25 to 45 constituencies, Greens fighting in 2, every vote elsewhere voters will know its waste of time filling in the form, as it doesn’t count in the real election. First past the post creates this different forced choice election.

Whatever polls have been telling you, please remember they are not predictive, the minds of voters can move very quickly when the narrative changes - shift in just the 4 weeks of an election in defiance of real local elections votes mere weeks before. A July 4th election will be set against inflation under 2%, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth, and BOE announced interest rate cut and mortgage lenders responding - the credit crunch and Truss budget will be from a different time and place, years ago. Also thousands of Asylum Seekers have been rounded up into detention and planes taking off deporting them to Africa, with Ireland and the EU bleeting deterrents like this are just not playing fair, as they are now getting the immigrants once set on Britain.

Those are just the known knowns, relentlessly across media that will reshape the narrative in the six weeks till polling day. What’s unknown knowns is what dirt will be thrown at Labour front bench. Fact is, just footage of Starmer at a window holding a beer, reduced a 10 point labour lead down to just 4 points when relentlessly thrown at him daily in a campaign month two years ago. The unknown unknowns I ask you to consider, is impact on polls of Nigel Farage invited to join the Conservative Party, and stand for them as a Conservative candidate.

Secondly, I thank you Stodge for your fine headers on the Local Elections, where you have given us what to watch to calibrate what is good middling and bad night for each party. But what PNS and NEV will show us Labour underperforming the polling, what share figure shows them underperforming against the westminster polling, but still on cusp of a parliamentary majority? I found a NEV of 12% is the least Labour need to get this week to form a majority government - and even that figure is way beneath the swings in the polling. How do you understand it?

Local elections are not national elections. There is considerable polling evidence that the Cons nationally are remarkably more unpopular than local conservatives. There is a reason so many candidates choose to identify themselves as just that, 'Local Conservatives'. There is a reason Mayoral candidates have been distancing themselves from the dreaded C-word, even with the local branding.

Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one. Remember when the story broke and when the 'campaign' ended. Any impact was minimal at best. It was also something of a one-shot pistol. An aspect of the failure of the Rayner allegations to move the polls is that Currygate turned out to be, how should we say this, a load of bollocks.

Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE. Well, probably. However, not inevitably. I think Lab will have to make a major mistake and that is not impossible. However, to assume it will happen is to seriously under-estimate Starmer. He does not have to be brilliant he just has to be better than his opponent and at the moment that opponent seems very likely to be Mr Rishi Sunak.

Think on that - have you seen any evidence that Mr Sunak can maintain a credible election campaign? Can you imagine him facing a 'job interview' style grilling from a serious journalist? Can you imagine him in a debate with Starmer? To have a chance of closing the gap to any meaningful degree he willl have to do all of those and do them well.

In my many GEs I have only ever voted Lab once. I am no fan-boy for Starmer. However, their (not so) secret weapons are going to be front and centre throughout the GE campaign whenever it comes. Their names - Mr Rishi Sunak and the truly pathetic record of the current Govt.

We can all hope for miracles but they hardly ever come.

“Currygate closed the polls? You might like to check the figures on that one.”
The evidence absolutely supports me on that one. Go look, just 4% gap when it came to polling day.
It actually worked. By the end of the campaign Labour couldn’t get its message across for being asked by every media outfit about beergate.

“Meanwhile we can assume the polls will narrow in the run in to the GE.”
I am arguing they will close to just a 5 point gap without any swingback from Lab to Con, just reuniting of the centre right bloc.

Sunak is a drag on Tory polling, though maybe not ultimately huge drag on votes as you assume.
Sunak and Hunt will be thought of differently than last year, last month, last week and next week after a 6 week campaign built upon inflation under 2%, BOE interest rate cut, economy out of recession with strong 2024 growth. The fact Labour have called the Rwanda policy so badly only accelerates that Ref to Con campaign period swingback.

You don’t understand do you? Just watch. watch it happen just like this.

You've come back madder than ever MarchMoonHare!

Up the Tories!

I thought they were spoofing the other day and I’m still not sure. No one can be reading the mood of the nation this badly can they?

The amount of Tory ramping on here at the moment does make one question the saliency of the polls. Are they reading the mood more appropriately than the polling would suggest they should?

I've always had the General Election as close and the boundaries, the voter suppression, the imported voters, the media narrative and the arithmetic could favour the Tories, but I may have to add to that the general idea that those who vote are rather content with the status quo. Perhaps we get an idea if they are right or not on Thursday. Anything under 300 council seat losses , Street and Houchen winning and Hall running Khan close will be a very good night for Sunak.

Its hopium: 'I am a Tory. What I believe is just. I am a good person. So I can't be that disconnected from what most people thing - the polls must be wrong.'

I understand hopium. I was full of it in 2015, thinking our Labour campaign in Stockton South had genuine hope of overturning the local scumbag Tory. Didn't get close - but then we won unexpectedly in 2017.

The Tories will find something to cling to on Thursday, and that thing may be the Lord Houchen of Teesport. Once Labour win the election and the NAO get at it, the fella has a limited future, but for a brief moment he will be the shining star which makes hopium sufferers believe in fairies that little bit harder.

Not a Tory but I am thinking Ireland may offer Sunak an astonishingly elegant get out of jail card. Threat of Rwanda sends boat people to Ireland. Ireland has a long history of riots about immigrants. Their population is 5 million so if just 7% of channel crossers go on to Ireland they have proportionally the same problem as the UK. They can no more stop them at the border than we can because it doesn't physically exist, 270 roads cross it and the GFA pretty much prohibits policing it. They can legislate all they like about sending them back, but you can't legislate yourself the right to do that. Harris is 100% under the cosh and gets on the blower to Macron who suddenly thinks of effective ways to stop the boats at his end.

But that means 93% of channel crossers* have remained in the UK - instantly saturating the Rwandan option. And wrecking it. So no need to go to Ireland ...

*Not the only illegal immigrants, of course, either.

And Ireland was facing a large increase in asylum seekers anyway. Whether there's an actual incremental surge on the eve of Rwanda isn't clear, although you'd expect there might be. If I were already here and seeing the Rwanda news I'd be tempted to make a little excursion to the emerald isle, knowing once I have my claimed dealt with I can make use of the open border to get back with my friends and relatives in London.

People are creative and resourceful. Especially smugglers. I wonder if we might see a new route opening up: channel from France to England, smuggled through Britain to NI then Ireland, claim asylum there. That will then test the question of whether what the government really wants is to stop the boats or just stop people settling in the UK.

NickPalmer

kjh said:

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

It is difficult to tell isn't it, if you are directly involved. I get a lot, but it does mostly look like stuff I am getting because I am a member. I have no idea what others are getting.

In Guildford the LDs are working very hard, even though they don't have locals, with teams out everyday and regular big action days. Again this looks like a lot of effort to me, but when diluted over the whole constituency does it look like a lot to the general public?

I'm not a great consumer of social media, but FWIW I see almost nothing from any of the parties, except for stuff that I get as a party member. Locally there is a political forum where half a dozen partisans quarrel like PB on a bad day, but all the mainstream forums discourage political posts.

Like the LDs in Guildford we don't have locals in Didcot and Wantage but Labour are out most days with canvassing teams and street stalls. There's quite a lot of interest as people who've lived here for a while are unaccustomed to serious Labour activity. But as kjh says, it's hard to get a clear picture of what the general public is aware of.

Most postal voters have seemingly done their duty in the crime commissioner election, though I've yet to see a single leaflet on that apart from what we were putting out ourselves. Things will pick up further after Thursday as some of the activists of all parties are helping out in Oxford, Reading and other places.

kle4

StillWaters said:

kle4 said:

Foxy said:

Thanks @Stodge. It's a shame though that local elections are mostly seen as a barometer of national voting intention. Largely due to the very limited powers of local government to do anything apart from declare bankruptcy I suppose.

I only get a supremely pointless PCC election to vote for. Isn't it time we abolished these?

If there were no Labour PCCs maybe that would happen, but since there are I can't see Keir doing it unfortunately.

The logic behind PCCs was that you need someone to set strategic priorities for the police and ensure oversight. That body needs to be democratically accountable.

Prior to PCCs you had police authorities which were notoriously corrupt and suffered from regulatory capture by the police (they were nominated by local councillors).

Combining the PCC with the elected mayor position makes sense but you also need a solution for those parts of the country where there are no mayors

The logic never made any sense since most pccs will win or lose based on party affiliation. Now you have pccs nominally overseeing the police, and police and crime panels overseeing them to check they are overseeing the pcc.

As you say there's slightly better logic where there is a mayor.

Pulpstar

eek said:

In other news - if Rishi was hoping that interest rates were going to drop the major mortgage banks have just upped their rates.

A 5 year fixed that cost 4.28% in February is now 4.84%.. That's £5.60 extra a year for every £1000 borrowed.

I'm remortaging next March, can you stick a trigger warning on your posts ?

twistedfirestopper3

Sandpit said:

Stuartinromford said:

eek said:

In other news - if Rishi was hoping that interest rates were going to drop the major mortgage banks have just upped their rates.

A 5 year fixed that cost 4.28% in February is now 4.84%.. That's £5.60 extra a year for every £1000 borrowed.

Fortunately for Rishi, most people are on fixed rates.

Unfortunately for Rishi, there is still a steady flow of people having to update their fixed rates from 1% to 5%.

Some of us have been pointing out this one for ages now, that every month there’s 100k mortgages renewed. So in the six months between May and November, over a million adults will likely be directly impacted, and many more indirectly impacted (adult children, dependent parents) by MASSIVELY rising interest rates, irrespective of whether or not tha Bank cuts a quarter point over the summer.

I've been following this for ages, but most people just see "inflation falling" and crack open the champagne. Mortgage arrears are on the up and it's only going to get worse.

kle4

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News for £s?

What a little tease he is. Some Tories want him so badly its sad.

NickPalmer

Foxy said:

Thanks @Stodge. It's a shame though that local elections are mostly seen as a barometer of national voting intention. Largely due to the very limited powers of local government to do anything apart from declare bankruptcy I suppose.

I only get a supremely pointless PCC election to vote for. Isn't it time we abolished these?

I'm genuinely unsure. They do get to set priorities for what the police should respond to first. My local Labour PCC candidate is a lawyer specialising in prosecuting rape and sexual violence, who proposes to make that a priority, contrasting it with the current Tory's priorities which include issues like action against travellers. That seems to me a reasonably concrete issue but how far it affects actual policing on the ground I really don't know. Does anyone here have closer experience?

Nigelb

School dinners: Boy given single nugget in wrap for lunch
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-68920343

Alphabet_Soup

NickPalmer said:

kjh said:

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

It is difficult to tell isn't it, if you are directly involved. I get a lot, but it does mostly look like stuff I am getting because I am a member. I have no idea what others are getting.

In Guildford the LDs are working very hard, even though they don't have locals, with teams out everyday and regular big action days. Again this looks like a lot of effort to me, but when diluted over the whole constituency does it look like a lot to the general public?

I'm not a great consumer of social media, but FWIW I see almost nothing from any of the parties, except for stuff that I get as a party member. Locally there is a political forum where half a dozen partisans quarrel like PB on a bad day, but all the mainstream forums discourage political posts.

Like the LDs in Guildford we don't have locals in Didcot and Wantage but Labour are out most days with canvassing teams and street stalls. There's quite a lot of interest as people who've lived here for a while are unaccustomed to serious Labour activity. But as kjh says, it's hard to get a clear picture of what the general public is aware of.

Most postal voters have seemingly done their duty in the crime commissioner election, though I've yet to see a single leaflet on that apart from what we were putting out ourselves. Things will pick up further after Thursday as some of the activists of all parties are helping out in Oxford, Reading and other places.

I have received no information from any candidate in the Warwickshire PCC election so it's impossible to judge what any of them is offering. The incumbent (Tory) is standing for re-election and there doesn't seem to be a groundswell of pubic disquiet, but it would be interesting to know from any other candidates what they would do that's different. Party labels don't mean a great deal since it's hard to see how a more-or-less collectivist approach or a more-or-less private enterprise approach would make any difference in practice.

nico679

Alphabet_Soup said:

NickPalmer said:

kjh said:

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

It is difficult to tell isn't it, if you are directly involved. I get a lot, but it does mostly look like stuff I am getting because I am a member. I have no idea what others are getting.

In Guildford the LDs are working very hard, even though they don't have locals, with teams out everyday and regular big action days. Again this looks like a lot of effort to me, but when diluted over the whole constituency does it look like a lot to the general public?

I'm not a great consumer of social media, but FWIW I see almost nothing from any of the parties, except for stuff that I get as a party member. Locally there is a political forum where half a dozen partisans quarrel like PB on a bad day, but all the mainstream forums discourage political posts.

Like the LDs in Guildford we don't have locals in Didcot and Wantage but Labour are out most days with canvassing teams and street stalls. There's quite a lot of interest as people who've lived here for a while are unaccustomed to serious Labour activity. But as kjh says, it's hard to get a clear picture of what the general public is aware of.

Most postal voters have seemingly done their duty in the crime commissioner election, though I've yet to see a single leaflet on that apart from what we were putting out ourselves. Things will pick up further after Thursday as some of the activists of all parties are helping out in Oxford, Reading and other places.

I have received no information from any candidate in the Warwickshire PCC election so it's impossible to judge what any of them is offering. The incumbent (Tory) is standing for re-election and there doesn't seem to be a groundswell of pubic disquiet, but it would be interesting to know from any other candidates what they would do that's different. Party labels don't mean a great deal since it's hard to see how a more-or-less collectivist approach or a more-or-less private enterprise approach would make any difference in practice.

Same here in Eastbourne . Not a single leaflet has arrived . I expect turnout to be woeful in areas with just PCC elections .

HYUFD

Thanks Stodge for your comments and yes it may be the Tories holding 1 seat while losing 2 in a few of the 3 seat wards up in the all out elections enables them to hold EFDC. I largely agree with your other predictions.

Though Labour should certainly be aiming to win Basildon, Gloucester and Harlow and also take control of Nuneaton and Redditch on Thursday if they are heading for a landslide. Those were all areas won by Blair in 1997

JosiasJessop

A piece of Scottish history I was unaware of:

"George Square in 1957, featuring the x-ray screening centre which was set up as part of the campaign against tuberculosis. Thirty seven mobile units also travelled the city, and in all 714, 915 people were x-rayed in an effort to eradicate the disease."

https://twitter.com/GC_Archives/status/1784640036404637993

MattW

Alphabet_Soup said:

NickPalmer said:

kjh said:

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

It is difficult to tell isn't it, if you are directly involved. I get a lot, but it does mostly look like stuff I am getting because I am a member. I have no idea what others are getting.

In Guildford the LDs are working very hard, even though they don't have locals, with teams out everyday and regular big action days. Again this looks like a lot of effort to me, but when diluted over the whole constituency does it look like a lot to the general public?

I'm not a great consumer of social media, but FWIW I see almost nothing from any of the parties, except for stuff that I get as a party member. Locally there is a political forum where half a dozen partisans quarrel like PB on a bad day, but all the mainstream forums discourage political posts.

Like the LDs in Guildford we don't have locals in Didcot and Wantage but Labour are out most days with canvassing teams and street stalls. There's quite a lot of interest as people who've lived here for a while are unaccustomed to serious Labour activity. But as kjh says, it's hard to get a clear picture of what the general public is aware of.

Most postal voters have seemingly done their duty in the crime commissioner election, though I've yet to see a single leaflet on that apart from what we were putting out ourselves. Things will pick up further after Thursday as some of the activists of all parties are helping out in Oxford, Reading and other places.

I have received no information from any candidate in the Warwickshire PCC election so it's impossible to judge what any of them is offering. The incumbent (Tory) is standing for re-election and there doesn't seem to be a groundswell of pubic disquiet, but it would be interesting to know from any other candidates what they would do that's different. Party labels don't mean a great deal since it's hard to see how a more-or-less collectivist approach or a more-or-less private enterprise approach would make any difference in practice.

I'd suggest the most useful indicator for PCC elections is around last times results plus a more cautious version of general swings, perhaps impacted by same day Elections.

This is Warwickshire last time, which could be in play but there is no Reform candidate this time, which would I surmise help the Tory. I'd say likely to stay unchanged, unless there is a strong local factor.


In my area Notts the victory last time was about 53:47 for the Conservative Candidate, who is an irremediable klutz and the police are now in special measures, so I'd call it 80% going Labour.

That adds vert little to PB conventional wisdom, perhaps.

bondegezou

Have we done the new West Midlands poll from YouGov?

Con 41%
Lab 39%
Green 6%
LD 2%
RefUK 9%
oth 3%

That'll cheer the Tories if it happens. If they hold this and Houchen's mayoralty, they'll be over the moon.

ydoethur

bondegezou said:

Have we done the new West Midlands poll from YouGov?

Con 41%
Lab 39%
Green 6%
LD 2%
RefUK 9%
oth 3%

That'll cheer the Tories if it happens. If they hold this and Houchen's mayoralty, they'll be over the moon.

I thought they already were.

Well, they seem on a different planet from the rest of us.

Dura_Ace

kle4 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News for £s?

What a little tease he is. Some Tories want him so badly its sad.

What are his options though? Stand as a candidate for Fukkers and take a tilt at brushed aluminium cyber-cock Dan Jarvis in Barnsleh?

Icarus

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

In South Leicestershire we have been leafleting for the PCC though also has a photo of our GE candidate. The results are declared by district council not on a constituency basis so will not be easy to see if made any impact

Nigelb

The BBC (who are far from unique in such reporting) need to better check their facts.

Tensions grow as China ramps up global mining for green tech

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-68896707
...It was just 10 years ago that a Chinese company bought the country's first stake in an extraction project within the "lithium triangle" of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, which holds most of the world's lithium reserves.*
Many further Chinese investments in local mining operations have followed, according to mining publications, and corporate, government and media reports. The BBC calculates that based on their shareholdings, Chinese companies now control an estimated 33% of the lithium at projects currently producing the mineral or those under construction...

* It doesn't.

The biggest known extractable lithium resource on the planet is probably in the US. Lithium is an extremely common element globally; the market issue is more about the economic, environmental and political costs of extraction.

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/lithium-discovery-in-us-volcano-could-be-biggest-deposit-ever-found/4018032.article
..An estimated 20 to 40 million tonnes of lithium metal lie within a volcanic crater formed around 16 million years ago. This is notably larger than the lithium deposits found beneath a Bolivian salt flat, previously considered the largest deposit in the world. Mining at the site is, however, contested by Native Americans for whom the area is sacred, and is believed to be where a massacre took place in 1865...

New in situ analysis reveals that an unusual claystone, composed of the mineral illite, contains 1.3% to 2.4% of lithium in the volcanic crater. This is almost double the lithium present in the main lithium-bearing clay mineral, magnesium smectite, which is more common than illite...

bondegezou

kle4 said:

StillWaters said:

kle4 said:

Foxy said:

Thanks @Stodge. It's a shame though that local elections are mostly seen as a barometer of national voting intention. Largely due to the very limited powers of local government to do anything apart from declare bankruptcy I suppose.

I only get a supremely pointless PCC election to vote for. Isn't it time we abolished these?

If there were no Labour PCCs maybe that would happen, but since there are I can't see Keir doing it unfortunately.

The logic behind PCCs was that you need someone to set strategic priorities for the police and ensure oversight. That body needs to be democratically accountable.

Prior to PCCs you had police authorities which were notoriously corrupt and suffered from regulatory capture by the police (they were nominated by local councillors).

Combining the PCC with the elected mayor position makes sense but you also need a solution for those parts of the country where there are no mayors

The logic never made any sense since most pccs will win or lose based on party affiliation. Now you have pccs nominally overseeing the police, and police and crime panels overseeing them to check they are overseeing the pcc.

As you say there's slightly better logic where there is a mayor.

Some PCC results have gone against party lines, with independents sometimes doing well, which suggests that, to an extent, they can attract their own democratic legitimacy.

But then the very low turnouts argue against that!

Mexicanpete

HYUFD said:

Thanks Stodge for your comments and yes it may be the Tories holding 1 seat while losing 2 in a few of the 3 seat wards up in the all out elections enables them to hold EFDC. I largely agree with your other predictions.

Though Labour should certainly be aiming to win Basildon, Gloucester and Harlow and also take control of Nuneaton and Redditch on Thursday if they are heading for a landslide. Those were all areas won by Blair in 1997

Hasn't the dynamic in Nuneaton and Redditch changed significantly since 1997? On my regular visits to Redditch it seems very much a Conservative fiefdom.

Malmesbury

NickPalmer said:

Foxy said:

Thanks @Stodge. It's a shame though that local elections are mostly seen as a barometer of national voting intention. Largely due to the very limited powers of local government to do anything apart from declare bankruptcy I suppose.

I only get a supremely pointless PCC election to vote for. Isn't it time we abolished these?

I'm genuinely unsure. They do get to set priorities for what the police should respond to first. My local Labour PCC candidate is a lawyer specialising in prosecuting rape and sexual violence, who proposes to make that a priority, contrasting it with the current Tory's priorities which include issues like action against travellers. That seems to me a reasonably concrete issue but how far it affects actual policing on the ground I really don't know. Does anyone here have closer experience?

That sounds like the priorities that were tried under Blair - 100% on the serious crimes, only get to the small stuff if that was all done. Which meant that a number of crimes became completely ignored. The problem, in turn, with that approach is that this feeds into the "broken windows" effect - the community starts feeling that it's an anything goes area.

In the case of the traveller thing, I witnessed a situation where a community was repeatedly told that traveller crimes (shop lifting and assault mainly) wouldn't be dealt with - because any attempt at arrests would be expensive due to the resulting disorder. The end result was inevitable - some people in the community took their own action. The next day the town was flooded with police trying to find the perpetrators. Of the action against the travellers.

Theuniondivvie

..

Dura_Ace said:

kle4 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News for £s?

What a little tease he is. Some Tories want him so badly its sad.

What are his options though? Stand as a candidate for Fukkers and take a tilt at brushed aluminium cyber-cock Dan Jarvis in Barnsleh?

Steely Dan?

CarlottaVance

Odd that....

Kate Forbes’ religion comes up a lot. I don’t remember this happening with the previous / current leader, except when he brought it up himself.

https://x.com/leng_cath/status/1785187343638393026

bondegezou

TimS said:

kjh said:

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

It is difficult to tell isn't it, if you are directly involved. I get a lot, but it does mostly look like stuff I am getting because I am a member. I have no idea what others are getting.

In Guildford the LDs are working very hard, even though they don't have locals, with teams out everyday and regular big action days. Again this looks like a lot of effort to me, but when diluted over the whole constituency does it look like a lot to the general public?

I think we may be seeing something of the change in tactics after the failure of 2019. There the focus was on the air war and a national strategy. Now we're going in the opposite direction with hyper-targeted, hyper-local campaigning. I do worry this is a bit of an over correction. It means people not in Lib Dem targets or in the core target demographic see almost nothing of the party (not helped by complete press disinterest) and that helps to feed a "Davey is invisible" narrative. See PB for evidence of this.

We are badly in need of elections. Parliamentary byelections where LDs are the main challengers are the gold standard, but locals will do nicely too. The Euros used to be another opportunity but they have been cruelly wrested from our grasp by Brexit. Ironically the one type of election that UKIP and its descendants always excelled at.

Come the general election campaign, reporting requirements will give the LDs more national visibility and the party often sees a rise from pre-campaign polling.

LostPassword

Nigelb said:

School dinners: Boy given single nugget in wrap for lunch
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-68920343

I'd imagine that managing a classroom of teenagers was hard enough, but managing a classroom of hungry teenagers must be impossible.

eristdoof

HYUFD said:

Thanks Stodge for your comments and yes it may be the Tories holding 1 seat while losing 2 in a few of the 3 seat wards up in the all out elections enables them to hold EFDC. I largely agree with your other predictions.

Though Labour should certainly be aiming to win Basildon, Gloucester and Harlow and also take control of Nuneaton and Redditch on Thursday if they are heading for a landslide. Those were all areas won by Blair in 1997

As far as I recall, the local elections in 1997 were only a few weeks after the general election. As a result the Conservative vote was even more depleted for the local elections. This year the locals are (?)several months before the GE. If most of these councils go labour on Friday, then Starmer really should be heading for a 1997 style landslide.

Mexicanpete

kle4 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News for £s?

What a little tease he is. Some Tories want him so badly its sad.

Surely he has to stand as a Conservative in some coastal Essex hellhole.

Theuniondivvie

Perhaps not an entirely welcome test for Katie Diadhaidh this week.

topov

kjh said:

TimS said:

Scott_xP said:

@LukeTryl
🚨Our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention in today’s Playbook finds the lowest Conservative share we’ve recorded at just 24% and the Labour lead at 19pts.

🌹 Labour 43% (-)
🌳Conservatives 24% (-2)
🔶Lib Dem 11% (+1)
🟣Reform UK 11% (-)
💚Greens 6% (-1)

N: 2053
26-28/4

Lib Dem pre-locals surge!

Though actually, I’ve noticed a roughly ten-
fold increase in LD social media noise over the usual volume in the last week. There is obviously money being spent.

I will be getting more of it than most given my existing propensities, but I’m not in a marginal council or Westminster seat so I expect others will be getting even more.

It is difficult to tell isn't it, if you are directly involved. I get a lot, but it does mostly look like stuff I am getting because I am a member. I have no idea what others are getting.

In Guildford the LDs are working very hard, even though they don't have locals, with teams out everyday and regular big action days. Again this looks like a lot of effort to me, but when diluted over the whole constituency does it look like a lot to the general public?

FWIW there were 3 lib dems handing out leaflets ouside Godalming station at 7:30 this morning and being studiously ignored by the vast majority of commuters.

Icarus

Mexicanpete said:

kle4 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News for £s?

What a little tease he is. Some Tories want him so badly its sad.

Surely he has to stand as a Conservative in some coastal Essex hellhole.

But would that move as many possible Conservative voters away as attract Reform voters back?

He surely has to back Reform.

Mexicanpete

Icarus said:

Mexicanpete said:

kle4 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

I wonder what considerable sacrifice he has in mind? Less time for rimming the Donald and gurning on GB News for £s?

What a little tease he is. Some Tories want him so badly its sad.

Surely he has to stand as a Conservative in some coastal Essex hellhole.

But would that move as many possible Conservative voters away as attract Reform voters back?

He surely has to back Reform.

It depends whether Farage wants to be an MP or an also-ran AGAIN!

Alphabet_Soup

CarlottaVance said:

Odd that....

Kate Forbes’ religion comes up a lot. I don’t remember this happening with the previous / current leader, except when he brought it up himself.

https://x.com/leng_cath/status/1785187343638393026

Catholics likewise.

"Do you accept Church doctrines on homosexuality and abortion or would you mind if we burnt you at the stake?"

ydoethur

Theuniondivvie said:

Perhaps not an entirely welcome test for Katie Diadhaidh this week.

Supporters groan: 'This attitude will de foetus.'

DecrepiterJohnL

CarlottaVance said:

Odd that....

Kate Forbes’ religion comes up a lot. I don’t remember this happening with the previous / current leader, except when he brought it up himself.

https://x.com/leng_cath/status/1785187343638393026

Methodist was he, this Humza Yousaf chap? And surely Kate Forbes brought up Kate Forbes' religion. People often do when it means a lot to them.

Luckyguy1983

DecrepiterJohnL said:

CarlottaVance said:

Odd that....

Kate Forbes’ religion comes up a lot. I don’t remember this happening with the previous / current leader, except when he brought it up himself.

https://x.com/leng_cath/status/1785187343638393026

Methodist was he, this Humza Yousaf chap? And surely Kate Forbes brought up Kate Forbes' religion. People often do when it means a lot to them.

You think being an observant Methodist raises more contentious issues than being an observant Muslim?