Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Starmer is the most popular politician in Britain – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,733
edited May 12 in General
Starmer is the most popular politician in Britain – politicalbetting.com

Keir Starmer is the most popular politician in Britain* pic.twitter.com/QqhFHgWA0d

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,593
    edited May 2
    YouGovs panel is polluted with lab grown gammon
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,297
    TimS said:

    kle4 said:

    5 hours until we get the first pithy comments from party folk, and an initial sense of where we are
    I love election day

    I would question whether initial pithy comments provide any actual sense of where things are, but it is a fun part of the process nonetheless.

    If Labour do not win every seat in the country I think it shows that people are not that keen on Keir Starmer.

    Too much for a Tory spokesman?
    The waiting around kills me. Why can’t we have electronic votes with a live tally as the day progresses? Much better for tactical voting.
    I like it: you'd really want to get your vote out as early as possible, to establish yourself as the main challengers to [x].
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,954
    edited May 2
    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,471
    Not saying much at the moment. None of them are too popular.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,593
    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Two thirds of your prospective vote feeling favourable towards you before you shit on their dreams is not a recipe for Sunshine und Roses
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,766
    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Perhaps Starmer will surprise on the upside?
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,472
    edited May 2
    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no, years-long honey moon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Starmer simply changes his mind so often nobody can trust him to do as he says

    The latest is the watering down of workers rights, including zero hours contracts, which I believe is the correct thing to do

    He leaves me unimpressed and I do not expect he will take the difficult decision needed such as abolished the triple lock or accepting retirement age rises to over 70

    And the biggest of all is the lack of any policy on social care which is fundamental to addressing the issues with the NHS

    Notwithstanding, the conservatives, like the SNP, need to go into opposition and decide where their future lies and let Starmer and labour come under the intense 24/7 media scrutiny that is now the way of politics
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 10,043
    edited May 2
    rcs1000 said:

    TimS said:

    kle4 said:

    5 hours until we get the first pithy comments from party folk, and an initial sense of where we are
    I love election day

    I would question whether initial pithy comments provide any actual sense of where things are, but it is a fun part of the process nonetheless.

    If Labour do not win every seat in the country I think it shows that people are not that keen on Keir Starmer.

    Too much for a Tory spokesman?
    The waiting around kills me. Why can’t we have electronic votes with a live tally as the day progresses? Much better for tactical voting.
    I like it: you'd really want to get your vote out as early as possible, to establish yourself as the main challengers to [x].
    Early or very late, like an eBay auction: wait until the last minute when you’re sure who the main challenger is then cast your vote at 9:59.

    The added bonus of seeing politicians publicly get complacent then be pipped at the post, or panic only to come home comfortably in the end.

    Start with an immediate 7am download of postal ballots to get the ball rolling.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,946
    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807

    Just like to congratulate the Greens on managing to get their election communication into my letter box just now, some seven hours after I actually voted.

    Any mention of the environment, or all blokes in dresses and Gaza?
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,857
    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is King.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,573
    I have to admit that having 28% of people like him is something of a triumph for Starmer. We really don't like any of our politicians, do we?
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807

    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is King.

    Except after nightfall, when he'd be the least equipped to get about in darkness.

    The blind folks aren't going to install street lights, are they?
  • Options
    BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,395
    Cookie said:

    boulay said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    megasaur said:

    Leon said:

    Further thoughts on Paris. It really depends where you go. The left bank is generally much better. The 6th and 7th look fine. Even around Gare Montparnasse it looks civilised

    It’s as soon as you cross the Seine and it’s anywhere in and around the 1st and 2nd, and of course, the Gare du Nord

    I’m about 300m from the Opera and I just saw a guy lying flat out on the bare sidewalk, face down, apparently comatose. Fentanyl or Tranq I presume

    You just didn’t see shit like that 20 years ago. Maybe even 5 years ago

    It’s particularly noticeable in Paris BECAUSE it was once so pristine - and always beautiful. Now she’s like a model that got beaten up and lost three teeth and potentially an eye

    I don't think it would be fent. Even our govt has the good sense to be monitoring the sewage for it and I am sure if the french found it the press would be full of omg le fent en Europe stories

    Excellent piece on what the us drug problem looks like in phoenix Arizona (doubly sad because phoenix Arizona features in the most feel good song ever written)

    https://walkingtheworld.substack.com/p/walking-phoenix
    By The Time I Get To Phoenix?

    That's more of a feel-melancholy song imo. Also a good example of how the vastness and diversity of America gives them such a songwriting advantage.

    By the time I get to Crawley she'll be ... well whatever she'll be doing it doesn't work at all, does it.
    "I never thought it would happen with me & the girl from Clapham..."
    I think the UK has decent songwriting scope. You have the Scottish Highlands, London, (think Baker Street, Waterloo Sunset). Sadly Wales and Cornwall haven't been successfully mined for pop songs.
    London has a lot of songs. Including one of the most beautiful songs ever written:

    A Nightingale Sang In Berkeley Square

    I reckon the Tori Amos version from Good Omens is particularly fine

    https://youtu.be/Q3VchDN_vN8?si=9ej6H9-I65-CQNIZ
    London also has Waterloo Sunset, which I would contend is also one of the most beautiful songs ever written.

    I have a thing about songs written on the vague theme of 'home', even if it's not my own home. See also:

    Local Hero
    Country Road
    Oblong of Dreams
    Wichita Lineman

    Any others?
    “Home” by Edward Sharpe and the magnetic zeros.

    https://youtu.be/DHEOF_rcND8?si=ByQURN_JXpk1vRns

    Hadn't come across that before - though it does sound familiar from somewhere.
    It is a fine song, anyway, and I shall add it to my summer playlist - it sits almost plum in the centre of the Cookie family taste venn diagram.
    A pedant would point out that at first listen it appears to be a love song rather than actually about home ('home is where I'm alone with you' - a fine sentiment, but one which actually hints that geography is unimportant, which is the opposite theme) - though it does have a chord structure hinting at themes of home. Anyway, it's lovely - thank you.
    I'm pretty sure that I introduced PB to that a few months back
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,857
    So, is it Brisk, or is it Steady?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,573

    Boris Johnson was turned away from a polling station when trying to vote in the local elections after forgetting to bring acceptable photo ID.

    Sky News understands polling station staff were forced to turn the former prime minister away after he initially failed to comply with legislation he introduced while he was in Downing Street.

    So that will be like the Covid regulations then?
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,593

    So, is it Brisk, or is it Steady?

    Sadiq claims it's low in his 6.30 gotv tweet
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,658
    DavidL said:

    I have to admit that having 28% of people like him is something of a triumph for Starmer. We really don't like any of our politicians, do we?

    We are living through an era in which our politicians are either despised, disliked, or not heard of by the vast majority of people. This is not a good thing at all.

    In terms of the header, Labour will be content that the four most 'liked' politicians belong to them.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,625

    (((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    6m
    For now all is calm. But remember, in three hours time everyone is going to be on here screaming about Rallings and Thrasher…
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,857

    So, is it Brisk, or is it Steady?

    Sadiq claims it's low in his 6.30 gotv tweet
    He'll win comfortably anyway, but not ideal for him.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 11,460

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Two thirds of your prospective vote feeling favourable towards you before you shit on their dreams is not a recipe for Sunshine und Roses
    Or fantastic expectation management.

    Looking at the SKS hate on here while remembering the tumescent enthusiasm for Liz “surprise on the upside” Truss barely 2 years ago is instructive.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,646
    Test:


  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,857
    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
  • Options
    RattersRatters Posts: 818
    I see the '500 Tory losses' is priced exactly at evens on Betfair.

    A good benchmark for outperforming expectations or not.

    Not that 450 losses can be hailed as a triumph.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,954

    So, is it Brisk, or is it Steady?

    Can it be brisk AND steady?
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807

    So, is it Brisk, or is it Steady?

    It depends who I'm doing it with.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,732

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Where's the evidence for Sunak being a competent administrator? Better than Truss, better than Johnson, but there's still an awful lot of space between that and competence.
  • Options
    MJWMJW Posts: 1,400
    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    The interesting question is whether 1997-style ratings are even possible anymore given the fact we are a more atomised society and everything a politician says is combed over and bound to annoy someone.

    For example, there's little doubt burying Corbynism as sharply as he has, has been a net positive for Starmer, but it has annoyed a significant tranche of people who now think he's awful.

    Political leadership now may not be about being incredibly popular with a huge number of people but with the right people.

    There maybe a parallel with Boris post-Brexit and pre-Partygate - who was unpopular in historical terms but had two things going for him that won him a healthy majority.

    Firstly, he was up against the even more unpopular Corbyn, secondly, he tended to be most popular with exactly the non-university educated older males who the Tories knew were open to switching votes. Meanwhile, those who loathed him were either never voting Tory or hated Corbyn more.

    Starmer may manage a similar trick in reverse by being appealing most to the kind of not very political middle-class, middle-aged dads and mums who used to split Tory as Labour were 'risky' but now have just stopped voting Tory after the past decade of dramas and stuck or falling living standards.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,593

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    A loveless second marriage with a local business owner for the sake of the kids.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,954
    DougSeal said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Two thirds of your prospective vote feeling favourable towards you before you shit on their dreams is not a recipe for Sunshine und Roses
    Or fantastic expectation management.

    Looking at the SKS hate on here while remembering the tumescent enthusiasm for Liz “surprise on the upside” Truss barely 2 years ago is instructive.
    From memory it was only really @Luckyguy1983 and @Leon would thought Loopy Lizzie might surprise on the upside.

    Everyone else thought she was as mad a box of frogs and saw the iceberg looming a mile off 😂
  • Options
    FF43FF43 Posts: 15,885
    Ratters said:

    I see the '500 Tory losses' is priced exactly at evens on Betfair.

    A good benchmark for outperforming expectations or not.

    Not that 450 losses can be hailed as a triumph.

    Losing half your current seats seems a low benchmark.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,024

    Just like to congratulate the Greens on managing to get their election communication into my letter box just now, some seven hours after I actually voted.

    Any mention of the environment, or all blokes in dresses and Gaza?
    Didn't read it for fear of being so enthused by it that I'd be suffering monumental regret at not having voted for them.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,335
    edited May 2
    Trump on Paris and London (courtesy of a Biden campaign account):

    https://x.com/bidenhq/status/1785759162783224174

    Trump: Look at Paris. Look at London. They're no longer recognizable. I'm going to get myself into a lot of trouble, but you know what? That's the fact, they are no longer recognizable. We can't let that happen here
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,954

    Test:


    Keep Calmer Vote... Bin Face! :D
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,646
    GIN1138 said:

    So, is it Brisk, or is it Steady?

    Can it be brisk AND steady?
    Strong und stable!
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,171

    DavidL said:

    I have to admit that having 28% of people like him is something of a triumph for Starmer. We really don't like any of our politicians, do we?

    We are living through an era in which our politicians are either despised, disliked, or not heard of by the vast majority of people. This is not a good thing at all.

    In terms of the header, Labour will be content that the four most 'liked' politicians belong to them.
    While too many individual politicians are deservedly disliked its not an easy job given the British people expect continual increases in personal wealth, to be given money to ensure that, to pay lower taxes, for people they don't like to pay higher taxes, for things they buy to get cheaper, for their own houses to increase in value, for other people's houses to decrease in value and for public services to be perfect.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,732
    FPT, but relevant here I think:
    stodge said:

    I see the YouGov poll has attracted plenty of comment.

    @MoonRabbit seems to think a deal will be done between Reform and the Conservatives and that will send all or nearly all the Reform support back to the Conservatives and I and others are wrong to think otherwise.

    That's an opinion and @MoonRabbit is entitled to it - I don't really know what the Conservatives can offer Reform to do a deal. Indeed, one could argue the bigger the defeat for the Conservatives the more likely Reform will effect a hostile post-election takeover and basically merge the parties by stealth or wealth or both.

    There's also the suggestion an avalanche of "good news" will bury any doubts and allow a re-invigorated Sunak to go to the country with confidence in early July. It's possible as are most things in this life but I fail to see how this damascene conversion of millions back to the Conservatives in the light of the last four years (and especially the last two) is going to happen.

    It doesn't matter what any of us think - time will tell, it always does. I'd also offer the thought just because something has never happened doesn't mean it can't. Sunak COULD reverse a 20-point deficit, Corbyn nearly did in 2017 and the Conservatives could get below 100 seats (they weren't that far from it in 1997).

    During the 2017 campaign, the Conservative rating didn't move that much. The big change was Corbyn uniting all the not-Conservative vote behind him.

    I suppose that could happen a bit, if Reform walk off the field of play, but it seems unlikely. We all know who Rishi is, and most of us don't like him or his party much.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,700
    GIN1138 said:

    DougSeal said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Two thirds of your prospective vote feeling favourable towards you before you shit on their dreams is not a recipe for Sunshine und Roses
    Or fantastic expectation management.

    Looking at the SKS hate on here while remembering the tumescent enthusiasm for Liz “surprise on the upside” Truss barely 2 years ago is instructive.
    From memory it was only really @Luckyguy1983 and @Leon would thought Loopy Lizzie might surprise on the upside.

    Everyone else thought she was as mad a box of frogs and saw the iceberg looming a mile off 😂
    You don't have a very good memory then. I thought she was a disaster during the early part of the campaign; I was in favour of PM. She grew on me as the least poor alternative in a one on one with Sunak (or more accurately he shrunk on me), and it was her actions and way of conducting herself when in Government that impressed me.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,291
    Boris Johnson turned away from polling station as he forgot his ID.

    "Sky News understands polling station staff were forced to turn the former prime minister away after he initially failed to comply with legislation he introduced while he was in Downing Street.

    Mr Johnson, who introduced the Elections Act requiring photo ID in 2022, was attempting to cast his ballot in South Oxfordshire, where a police and crime commissioner for the Thames Valley is being selected."

    Made my day.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,954

    Boris Johnson was turned away from a polling station when trying to vote in the local elections after forgetting to bring acceptable photo ID.

    Sky News understands polling station staff were forced to turn the former prime minister away after he initially failed to comply with legislation he introduced while he was in Downing Street.

    Nice to know that even out of power and out of politics, Boris still remains a complete and total shambles! 😂
  • Options
    VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,439
    A queue had formed to vote in the polling station when I voted a few minutes ago.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,171
    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Not to mention that Blair became PM at about the easiest time during the entire 20th century.

    Starmer will have a much harder job in a much more dangerous and unpredictable world.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807
    So once the polls have closed and Houchen has secured the votes, it will be OK for the government to announce the cancellation of investment on Teesside.

    Just a hunch.
  • Options
    MJWMJW Posts: 1,400

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Where's the evidence for Sunak being a competent administrator? Better than Truss, better than Johnson, but there's still an awful lot of space between that and competence.
    Don't know if he's a competent administrator but if it's as bad as his political judgment it's lucky we haven't all fallen in the sea.
  • Options
    CleitophonCleitophon Posts: 256

    FPT, but relevant here I think:

    stodge said:

    I see the YouGov poll has attracted plenty of comment.

    @MoonRabbit seems to think a deal will be done between Reform and the Conservatives and that will send all or nearly all the Reform support back to the Conservatives and I and others are wrong to think otherwise.

    That's an opinion and @MoonRabbit is entitled to it - I don't really know what the Conservatives can offer Reform to do a deal. Indeed, one could argue the bigger the defeat for the Conservatives the more likely Reform will effect a hostile post-election takeover and basically merge the parties by stealth or wealth or both.

    There's also the suggestion an avalanche of "good news" will bury any doubts and allow a re-invigorated Sunak to go to the country with confidence in early July. It's possible as are most things in this life but I fail to see how this damascene conversion of millions back to the Conservatives in the light of the last four years (and especially the last two) is going to happen.

    It doesn't matter what any of us think - time will tell, it always does. I'd also offer the thought just because something has never happened doesn't mean it can't. Sunak COULD reverse a 20-point deficit, Corbyn nearly did in 2017 and the Conservatives could get below 100 seats (they weren't that far from it in 1997).

    During the 2017 campaign, the Conservative rating didn't move that much. The big change was Corbyn uniting all the not-Conservative vote behind him.

    I suppose that could happen a bit, if Reform walk off the field of play, but it seems unlikely. We all know who Rishi is, and most of us don't like him or his party much.
    I follow the express commentariat and they loathe Sunak and the tories. If Reform steps aside they will mainly stay home. To these characters conservative and Labour are simply the same "status quo" "consocialism". A deal will change nothing.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,954

    GIN1138 said:

    DougSeal said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Two thirds of your prospective vote feeling favourable towards you before you shit on their dreams is not a recipe for Sunshine und Roses
    Or fantastic expectation management.

    Looking at the SKS hate on here while remembering the tumescent enthusiasm for Liz “surprise on the upside” Truss barely 2 years ago is instructive.
    From memory it was only really @Luckyguy1983 and @Leon would thought Loopy Lizzie might surprise on the upside.

    Everyone else thought she was as mad a box of frogs and saw the iceberg looming a mile off 😂
    You don't have a very good memory then. I thought she was a disaster during the early part of the campaign; I was in favour of PM. She grew on me as the least poor alternative in a one on one with Sunak (or more accurately he shrunk on me), and it was her actions and way of conducting herself when in Government that impressed me.
    OK, so it was just @Leon who thought she might surprise on the upside...
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,946

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Of course. I think he's set some pretty low expectations so far - he may become more ambitious once elected (or not). I'm not sure what the zeitgeist is but I think you stay closer to it in Opposition than you do in Government and the longer any party stays in Government the further "removed" they get and the louder the accusations of being "out of touch".
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,171

    Trump on Paris and London (courtesy of a Biden campaign account):

    https://x.com/bidenhq/status/1785759162783224174

    Trump: Look at Paris. Look at London. They're no longer recognizable. I'm going to get myself into a lot of trouble, but you know what? That's the fact, they are no longer recognizable. We can't let that happen here

    They should be recognizable to a New Yorker.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,848
    For the first time in many years, I didn't vote!

    Not for lack of trying, my postal vote (which I usually deliver in person) got lost in all my travels

    For the record I would have voted against the awful Khan, dunno who for tho. Possibly binface
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,700
    GIN1138 said:

    GIN1138 said:

    DougSeal said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Two thirds of your prospective vote feeling favourable towards you before you shit on their dreams is not a recipe for Sunshine und Roses
    Or fantastic expectation management.

    Looking at the SKS hate on here while remembering the tumescent enthusiasm for Liz “surprise on the upside” Truss barely 2 years ago is instructive.
    From memory it was only really @Luckyguy1983 and @Leon would thought Loopy Lizzie might surprise on the upside.

    Everyone else thought she was as mad a box of frogs and saw the iceberg looming a mile off 😂
    You don't have a very good memory then. I thought she was a disaster during the early part of the campaign; I was in favour of PM. She grew on me as the least poor alternative in a one on one with Sunak (or more accurately he shrunk on me), and it was her actions and way of conducting herself when in Government that impressed me.
    OK, so it was just @Leon who thought she might surprise on the upside...
    By contrast, I *was* surprised on the upside!
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 5,110
    At least the weathers been okay for most parts today . Thats important this evening for Lab/Lib/Greens who will do better with those voting after work .

    The Tories tend to do better earlier in the day given they’re now so reliant on pensioners.

  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807
    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Of course. I think he's set some pretty low expectations so far - he may become more ambitious once elected (or not). I'm not sure what the zeitgeist is but I think you stay closer to it in Opposition than you do in Government and the longer any party stays in Government the further "removed" they get and the louder the accusations of being "out of touch".
    To paraphrase Blair:

    We were elected with no ambition. We will govern with no ambition.

  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    I voted for Uncle Festus, as PCC for Bedfordshire.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,848
    edited May 2

    Trump on Paris and London (courtesy of a Biden campaign account):

    https://x.com/bidenhq/status/1785759162783224174

    Trump: Look at Paris. Look at London. They're no longer recognizable. I'm going to get myself into a lot of trouble, but you know what? That's the fact, they are no longer recognizable. We can't let that happen here

    He's entirely right. The demographic shift in London is incredible. It was 80-90% native white British within living memory, just two or three decades? Now native whites are a minority. You can, of course, argue whether this is good or bad, or a mix, but has it happened? Yes

    Trying to deny it will make Dems looks stupid. Don't do it
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,431
    'Doncha you know who I am?!'

    Did the lazy fckr return with appropriate ID?




  • Options
    boulayboulay Posts: 4,154

    Cookie said:

    boulay said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    megasaur said:

    Leon said:

    Further thoughts on Paris. It really depends where you go. The left bank is generally much better. The 6th and 7th look fine. Even around Gare Montparnasse it looks civilised

    It’s as soon as you cross the Seine and it’s anywhere in and around the 1st and 2nd, and of course, the Gare du Nord

    I’m about 300m from the Opera and I just saw a guy lying flat out on the bare sidewalk, face down, apparently comatose. Fentanyl or Tranq I presume

    You just didn’t see shit like that 20 years ago. Maybe even 5 years ago

    It’s particularly noticeable in Paris BECAUSE it was once so pristine - and always beautiful. Now she’s like a model that got beaten up and lost three teeth and potentially an eye

    I don't think it would be fent. Even our govt has the good sense to be monitoring the sewage for it and I am sure if the french found it the press would be full of omg le fent en Europe stories

    Excellent piece on what the us drug problem looks like in phoenix Arizona (doubly sad because phoenix Arizona features in the most feel good song ever written)

    https://walkingtheworld.substack.com/p/walking-phoenix
    By The Time I Get To Phoenix?

    That's more of a feel-melancholy song imo. Also a good example of how the vastness and diversity of America gives them such a songwriting advantage.

    By the time I get to Crawley she'll be ... well whatever she'll be doing it doesn't work at all, does it.
    "I never thought it would happen with me & the girl from Clapham..."
    I think the UK has decent songwriting scope. You have the Scottish Highlands, London, (think Baker Street, Waterloo Sunset). Sadly Wales and Cornwall haven't been successfully mined for pop songs.
    London has a lot of songs. Including one of the most beautiful songs ever written:

    A Nightingale Sang In Berkeley Square

    I reckon the Tori Amos version from Good Omens is particularly fine

    https://youtu.be/Q3VchDN_vN8?si=9ej6H9-I65-CQNIZ
    London also has Waterloo Sunset, which I would contend is also one of the most beautiful songs ever written.

    I have a thing about songs written on the vague theme of 'home', even if it's not my own home. See also:

    Local Hero
    Country Road
    Oblong of Dreams
    Wichita Lineman

    Any others?
    “Home” by Edward Sharpe and the magnetic zeros.

    https://youtu.be/DHEOF_rcND8?si=ByQURN_JXpk1vRns

    Hadn't come across that before - though it does sound familiar from somewhere.
    It is a fine song, anyway, and I shall add it to my summer playlist - it sits almost plum in the centre of the Cookie family taste venn diagram.
    A pedant would point out that at first listen it appears to be a love song rather than actually about home ('home is where I'm alone with you' - a fine sentiment, but one which actually hints that geography is unimportant, which is the opposite theme) - though it does have a chord structure hinting at themes of home. Anyway, it's lovely - thank you.
    I'm pretty sure that I introduced PB to that a few months back
    That will be where I got the inspiration to buy the album from in 2010 when it came out. Thanks for the tip.
  • Options
    DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 712

    A queue had formed to vote in the polling station when I voted a few minutes ago.

    Yes same here, longest I've ever had to wait to vote, probably in the queue for about 7 minutes. But luckily they thought my out of date driving licence still looked like me :smiley:
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,162

    GIN1138 said:

    DougSeal said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Two thirds of your prospective vote feeling favourable towards you before you shit on their dreams is not a recipe for Sunshine und Roses
    Or fantastic expectation management.

    Looking at the SKS hate on here while remembering the tumescent enthusiasm for Liz “surprise on the upside” Truss barely 2 years ago is instructive.
    From memory it was only really @Luckyguy1983 and @Leon would thought Loopy Lizzie might surprise on the upside.

    Everyone else thought she was as mad a box of frogs and saw the iceberg looming a mile off 😂
    You don't have a very good memory then. I thought she was a disaster during the early part of the campaign; I was in favour of PM. She grew on me as the least poor alternative in a one on one with Sunak (or more accurately he shrunk on me), and it was her actions and way of conducting herself when in Government that impressed
    me.
    I’m not sure Sunak could shrink much more?
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,171

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Where's the evidence for Sunak being a competent administrator? Better than Truss, better than Johnson, but there's still an awful lot of space between that and competence.
    These things seem pretty competent - either as policies or administration - and based on compromises in difficult situations:

    The NI reductions funded by income tax allowance freezes.

    The Northern Ireland political administration and trade solution.

    The level of financial help for energy bills.

    Agreeing the last round of public sector pay claims.

    The change to migrants minimum earnings.
  • Options
    DonkeysDonkeys Posts: 723
    edited May 2
    500+ Con losses is edging above <500 at Betfair. Last matched prices: 1.92 and 2.08.

    493 would be more than half the contested seats they currently hold.
    657 would be more than two thirds.

    It's revealing that much more attention is on how many seats the Tories will lose than how many Labour will win.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,071
    Just voted. Kim McGuiness with no great enthusiasm.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    I was told by 6.30, about 50 had voted out of 3,000, in my quite prosperous polling district. Of course, there will be postal votes, in addition.
  • Options
    DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 712

    So, is it Brisk, or is it Steady?

    I suppose (if pretty unlikely) it could even be heavy?

    This feels like the turnout equivalent of the various types of "going" at racecourses.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,700

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Where's the evidence for Sunak being a competent administrator? Better than Truss, better than Johnson, but there's still an awful lot of space between that and competence.
    These things seem pretty competent - either as policies or administration - and based on compromises in difficult situations:

    The NI reductions funded by income tax allowance freezes.

    The Northern Ireland political administration and trade solution.

    The level of financial help for energy bills.

    Agreeing the last round of public sector pay claims.

    The change to migrants minimum earnings.
    Sunak’s energy support (as BJ's Chancellor) could have been classified as a discount on fuel, so would have been counterinflationary, but was classified as a benefit (or similar) driving inflation upward. That's an example of basic incompetence in delivering that support, that you wouldn't expect from someone who understood the issues.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,954
    Sean_F said:

    I was told by 6.30, about 50 had voted out of 3,000, in my quite prosperous polling district. Of course, there will be postal votes, in addition.

    Con voters sitting on their hands?

    Question is, will they return for the General Election?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,218
    Peterborough council was boasting on X that as many as 7% of voters had cast a ballot about half way through the day.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,164
    edited May 2
    Leon said:

    Trump on Paris and London (courtesy of a Biden campaign account):

    https://x.com/bidenhq/status/1785759162783224174

    Trump: Look at Paris. Look at London. They're no longer recognizable. I'm going to get myself into a lot of trouble, but you know what? That's the fact, they are no longer recognizable. We can't let that happen here

    He's entirely right. The demographic shift in London is incredible. It was 80-90% native white British within living memory, just two or three decades? Now native whites are a minority. You can, of course, argue whether this is good or bad, or a mix, but has it happened? Yes

    Trying to deny it will make Dems looks stupid. Don't do it
    Historically, looking at London since 1066 (at least) it’s been mostly migrant.

    Turn again, Whittington!
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,740
    MJW said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    The interesting question is whether 1997-style ratings are even possible anymore given the fact we are a more atomised society and everything a politician says is combed over and bound to annoy someone.

    For example, there's little doubt burying Corbynism as sharply as he has, has been a net positive for Starmer, but it has annoyed a significant tranche of people who now think he's awful.

    Political leadership now may not be about being incredibly popular with a huge number of people but with the right people.

    There maybe a parallel with Boris post-Brexit and pre-Partygate - who was unpopular in historical terms but had two things going for him that won him a healthy majority.

    Firstly, he was up against the even more unpopular Corbyn, secondly, he tended to be most popular with exactly the non-university educated older males who the Tories knew were open to switching votes. Meanwhile, those who loathed him were either never voting Tory or hated Corbyn more.

    Starmer may manage a similar trick in reverse by being appealing most to the kind of not very political middle-class, middle-aged dads and mums who used to split Tory as Labour were 'risky' but now have just stopped voting Tory after the past decade of dramas and stuck or falling living standards.
    Agree. This is an election with some interesting factors. The first is that Labour is back to a position of seeking to win from the centre, and this is unambiguous. The old leader is an MP but not for Labour. We forget how odd this all is.

    Secondly, the most recent Tory purge was of the centre, not the extreme. Gauke and co. This sad once great party is trying to win from two distinct articulations, populist grunting, and Hunt style poor man's Ken Clarke. Neither is done well.

    Neither party has an articulate programme; conditions are such that a realistic manifesto is not possible if you want to keep the voter onside.

    But Labour only have to be positioned as fairly safe; the Tories can't do this. They have been in power since 2010 and safe we are not.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,051
    Question. I booked a hotel a couple of days ago through Hotels.com, and used PayPal as payment. My friend subsequently cancelled the event so I cancelled the hotel through the hotels app. The payment is now going out for the original booking, pending... I assume the refund will follow about a week later ?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,610


    (((Dan Hodges)))
    @DPJHodges
    ·
    6m
    For now all is calm. But remember, in three hours time everyone is going to be on here screaming about Rallings and Thrasher…

    If only, just three hours
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,954
    Pulpstar said:

    Question. I booked a hotel a couple of days ago through Hotels.com, and used PayPal as payment. My friend subsequently cancelled the event so I cancelled the hotel through the hotels app. The payment is now going out for the original booking, pending... I assume the refund will follow about a week later ?

    I would call the hotel to make sure...
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,171

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Where's the evidence for Sunak being a competent administrator? Better than Truss, better than Johnson, but there's still an awful lot of space between that and competence.
    These things seem pretty competent - either as policies or administration - and based on compromises in difficult situations:

    The NI reductions funded by income tax allowance freezes.

    The Northern Ireland political administration and trade solution.

    The level of financial help for energy bills.

    Agreeing the last round of public sector pay claims.

    The change to migrants minimum earnings.
    Sunak’s energy support (as BJ's Chancellor) could have been classified as a discount on fuel, so would have been counterinflationary, but was classified as a benefit (or similar) driving inflation upward. That's an example of basic incompetence in delivering that support, that you wouldn't expect from someone who understood the issues.
    Giving it as a benefit allowed people to spend it as they thought best.

    The amount of support was about right in helping people generally, helping the vulnerable more and also encouraging energy efficiency.

    Now doubtless I'm in a minority but the changes to my energy usage I've made will allow permanent improved energy efficiency and overall cost savings.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,857
    GIN1138 said:

    Sean_F said:

    I was told by 6.30, about 50 had voted out of 3,000, in my quite prosperous polling district. Of course, there will be postal votes, in addition.

    Con voters sitting on their hands?

    Question is, will they return for the General Election?
    I think they'll turnout in London because Khan is disliked and effectively the incumbent Government.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,218
    edited May 2
    Leon said:

    Trump on Paris and London (courtesy of a Biden campaign account):

    https://x.com/bidenhq/status/1785759162783224174

    Trump: Look at Paris. Look at London. They're no longer recognizable. I'm going to get myself into a lot of trouble, but you know what? That's the fact, they are no longer recognizable. We can't let that happen here

    He's entirely right. The demographic shift in London is incredible. It was 80-90% native white British within living memory, just two or three decades? Now native whites are a minority. You can, of course, argue whether this is good or bad, or a mix, but has it happened? Yes

    Trying to deny it will make Dems looks stupid. Don't do it
    There's a slight difference between London and Paris though, which Trump wouldn't know or care about, which is that hardly anyone in London cares about race because most people get along fine 99% of the time. That isn't the impression one gets in Paris.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,689

    FPT, but relevant here I think:

    stodge said:

    I see the YouGov poll has attracted plenty of comment.

    @MoonRabbit seems to think a deal will be done between Reform and the Conservatives and that will send all or nearly all the Reform support back to the Conservatives and I and others are wrong to think otherwise.

    That's an opinion and @MoonRabbit is entitled to it - I don't really know what the Conservatives can offer Reform to do a deal. Indeed, one could argue the bigger the defeat for the Conservatives the more likely Reform will effect a hostile post-election takeover and basically merge the parties by stealth or wealth or both.

    There's also the suggestion an avalanche of "good news" will bury any doubts and allow a re-invigorated Sunak to go to the country with confidence in early July. It's possible as are most things in this life but I fail to see how this damascene conversion of millions back to the Conservatives in the light of the last four years (and especially the last two) is going to happen.

    It doesn't matter what any of us think - time will tell, it always does. I'd also offer the thought just because something has never happened doesn't mean it can't. Sunak COULD reverse a 20-point deficit, Corbyn nearly did in 2017 and the Conservatives could get below 100 seats (they weren't that far from it in 1997).

    During the 2017 campaign, the Conservative rating didn't move that much. The big change was Corbyn uniting all the not-Conservative vote behind him.

    I suppose that could happen a bit, if Reform walk off the field of play, but it seems unlikely. We all know who Rishi is, and most of us don't like him or his party much.
    what I’m pointing out is not based on “most”,

    you are underestimating the polling potential to dramatically change once starting gun fired - for obvious elephant in room you won’t acknowledge. We are getting misled by a diet of smorgasbord polling, we need more forced choice polling taken at same time. I think it’s only Delta who does it.

    The polling what matters to whole electorate, showing Labour ahead on all measures, bin it. For recovery to 34% Tories will focus on what matters to voters still leaning to them - it doesn’t matter a jot for every extra badger shot, 68% want Tories out even more, if Cons move from 24% to 32% and beyond targetting swingback. Tories have shipped about 10% to Reform in only 18 months, these are clearly softish votes. What do these recent reform voters, and those 2019 Tory Don’t Knows often in Mikes and TSE headers, need to hear during a campaign to be tempted back?

    Yes. how polls moved in 2017 and 2019 in campaign. Who saw it coming? Every GE becomes a “forced choice” because support for minor parties like Reforms manifesto of unicorns, comes under pressure. One candidate wins FPTP in large constituency’s, this usually reduces voter option to 2 candidates who can win the seat. Conservative or Starmer, or waste your vote nearly everywhere - love it or hate it, you can’t deny FPTP does do this. And Voters know how painful letting in a horrible government and PM they get stuck with for 5 years, most will use their vote wisely not chuck it away. When I see this smorgasbord polling “choose your preferred unicorn” I shout at the screen: that mountain of deliberately wasted votes just won’t happen! It never does in a UK GE, so why now?

    Only “Forced choice” polling from now gives us more realistic GE prediction. last forced choice poll I noted was by Delta in March, Lab just 11 points ahead 42% to 31%. Tories already polling in 30’s before start of campaigning, before two party emphasis and squeezing others gets serious.If forced choice polls taken exactly same time as normal one is completely different, and all have Tories in the 30+%, you will instantly see I’m right, too much full options polling like todays Yougov is misleading us.

    Achieving the change around I’m forecasting Lab 39 Con 33 as early as 4th of July 2024, Tories are ignoring 68% voters - that’s elephant in room you won’t acknowledge.

    you have to factor in how Tories and and the media will behave during the election - for the party who has given us one of the most corrupt governments clearly loves to set the police on opponents to investigate next to nothing. If you think Kinnock had a hard time in 1992, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Tories - outright power in the land last 14 years - hand in hand with their client media, even tried to stitch Ed Davey up with the entire post office scandal!

    It’s a perfect thread header to debate this underneath.
  • Options
    DonkeysDonkeys Posts: 723
    edited May 2
    There are now tent protests at many British universities, calling for divestment from Israel and an end to arming it. What they need is a unifying slogan. "BDS" (boycott, divestment, sanctions) would be one.

    Protests are bound to spread and be stepped up if the Israeli army assaults Rafah as seems likely.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 7,593
    Andy_JS said:

    Peterborough council was boasting on X that as many as 7% of voters had cast a ballot about half way through the day.

    Healthy participation.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,740

    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Of course. I think he's set some pretty low expectations so far - he may become more ambitious once elected (or not). I'm not sure what the zeitgeist is but I think you stay closer to it in Opposition than you do in Government and the longer any party stays in Government the further "removed" they get and the louder the accusations of being "out of touch".
    To paraphrase Blair:

    We were elected with no ambition. We will govern with no ambition.

    What would an ambitious Labour manifesto say, and with what generic conclusions, about borrowing, debt, deficit, interest rates, tax and increasing spending?
  • Options
    megasaurmegasaur Posts: 270

    So, is it Brisk, or is it Steady?

    I suppose (if pretty unlikely) it could even be heavy?

    This feels like the turnout equivalent of the various types of "going" at racecourses.
    There's a thing called a going stick. No idea how it works (specifically how you calibrate how much weight you apply to it to get the right answer).
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,047
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    Trump on Paris and London (courtesy of a Biden campaign account):

    https://x.com/bidenhq/status/1785759162783224174

    Trump: Look at Paris. Look at London. They're no longer recognizable. I'm going to get myself into a lot of trouble, but you know what? That's the fact, they are no longer recognizable. We can't let that happen here

    He's entirely right. The demographic shift in London is incredible. It was 80-90% native white British within living memory, just two or three decades? Now native whites are a minority. You can, of course, argue whether this is good or bad, or a mix, but has it happened? Yes

    Trying to deny it will make Dems looks stupid. Don't do it
    There's a slight difference between London and Paris though, which Trump wouldn't know or care about, which is that hardly anyone in London cares about race because most people get along fine 99% of the time. That isn't the impression one gets in Paris.
    Worth noting that Trump's native city has been dominated demographically by immigrants for nearly 200 years.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,171
    algarkirk said:

    MJW said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    The interesting question is whether 1997-style ratings are even possible anymore given the fact we are a more atomised society and everything a politician says is combed over and bound to annoy someone.

    For example, there's little doubt burying Corbynism as sharply as he has, has been a net positive for Starmer, but it has annoyed a significant tranche of people who now think he's awful.

    Political leadership now may not be about being incredibly popular with a huge number of people but with the right people.

    There maybe a parallel with Boris post-Brexit and pre-Partygate - who was unpopular in historical terms but had two things going for him that won him a healthy majority.

    Firstly, he was up against the even more unpopular Corbyn, secondly, he tended to be most popular with exactly the non-university educated older males who the Tories knew were open to switching votes. Meanwhile, those who loathed him were either never voting Tory or hated Corbyn more.

    Starmer may manage a similar trick in reverse by being appealing most to the kind of not very political middle-class, middle-aged dads and mums who used to split Tory as Labour were 'risky' but now have just stopped voting Tory after the past decade of dramas and stuck or falling living standards.
    Agree. This is an election with some interesting factors. The first is that Labour is back to a position of seeking to win from the centre, and this is unambiguous. The old leader is an MP but not for Labour. We forget how odd this all is.

    Secondly, the most recent Tory purge was of the centre, not the extreme. Gauke and co. This sad once great party is trying to win from two distinct articulations, populist grunting, and Hunt style poor man's Ken Clarke. Neither is done well.

    Neither party has an articulate programme; conditions are such that a realistic manifesto is not possible if you want to keep the voter onside.

    But Labour only have to be positioned as fairly safe; the Tories can't do this. They have been in power since 2010 and safe we are not.
    The people 'purged' from the Conservatives were not of the centre but extreme EUphiles.
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,689
    edited May 2
    Donkeys said:

    There are now tent protests at many British universities, calling for divestment from Israel and an end to arming it. What they need is a unifying slogan. "BDS" (boycott, divestment, sanctions) would be one.

    What they need is stop being so self serving, get off the fat arse of their sitting, and help the charities helping war torn people everywhere - not just Palestinians they see on their news, but the Sudanese and others they don’t.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,980
    edited May 2
    Leon said:

    Trump on Paris and London (courtesy of a Biden campaign account):

    https://x.com/bidenhq/status/1785759162783224174

    Trump: Look at Paris. Look at London. They're no longer recognizable. I'm going to get myself into a lot of trouble, but you know what? That's the fact, they are no longer recognizable. We can't let that happen here

    He's entirely right. The demographic shift in London is incredible. It was 80-90% native white British within living memory, just two or three decades? Now native whites are a minority. You can, of course, argue whether this is good or bad, or a mix, but has it happened? Yes

    Trying to deny it will make Dems looks stupid. Don't do it
    It's very Donald Chump: dog whistle, pea brain, delusional, a hint of Manifest Destiny, and racist just beneath the surface. Like much of his support base.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,857
    Donkeys said:

    There are now tent protests at many British universities, calling for divestment from Israel and an end to arming it. What they need is a unifying slogan. "BDS" (boycott, divestment, sanctions) would be one.

    Protests are bound to spread and be stepped up if the Israeli army assaults Rafah as seems likely.

    What monkey sees monkey does.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,431

    Donkeys said:

    There are now tent protests at many British universities, calling for divestment from Israel and an end to arming it. What they need is a unifying slogan. "BDS" (boycott, divestment, sanctions) would be one.

    What they need is stop being so self serving, get off the fat arse of their sitting, and help the charities helping war torn people everywhere - not just Palestinians they see on their news, but the Sudanese and others they can’t.
    Any word on your efforts on behalf of the Sudanese and others?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,047
    Are there many results tonight, or is it going to be dragged out?

    Never seen our polling station so quiet, but just PCC here and that is so pointless that I barely bothered myself. Just did my best to reduce the Tory NEV.
  • Options
    RattersRatters Posts: 818
    edited May 2
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    Trump on Paris and London (courtesy of a Biden campaign account):

    https://x.com/bidenhq/status/1785759162783224174

    Trump: Look at Paris. Look at London. They're no longer recognizable. I'm going to get myself into a lot of trouble, but you know what? That's the fact, they are no longer recognizable. We can't let that happen here

    He's entirely right. The demographic shift in London is incredible. It was 80-90% native white British within living memory, just two or three decades? Now native whites are a minority. You can, of course, argue whether this is good or bad, or a mix, but has it happened? Yes

    Trying to deny it will make Dems looks stupid. Don't do it
    There's a slight difference between London and Paris though, which Trump wouldn't know or care about, which is that hardly anyone in London cares about race because most people get along fine 99% of the time. That isn't the impression one gets in Paris.
    Yep absolutely.

    My impression from living in London is the number of areas with a bad reputation has steadily declined. Gentrification and development has expanded the number of areas desirable to one age group or another.

    The ethnic composition is not remarked upon by Londoners who actually spend most their time in London.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807
    Donkeys said:

    There are now tent protests at many British universities, calling for divestment from Israel and an end to arming it. What they need is a unifying slogan. "BDS" (boycott, divestment, sanctions) would be one.

    Protests are bound to spread and be stepped up if the Israeli army assaults Rafah as seems likely.

    I thought that these Hamas apologists already had a slogan. Something about a river and the sea.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,700

    Donkeys said:

    There are now tent protests at many British universities, calling for divestment from Israel and an end to arming it. What they need is a unifying slogan. "BDS" (boycott, divestment, sanctions) would be one.

    Protests are bound to spread and be stepped up if the Israeli army assaults Rafah as seems likely.

    What monkey sees monkey does.
    It is cringeworthy. Our students can't even come up with a homegrown cause to get their knickers in a twist about.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,646

    Donkeys said:

    There are now tent protests at many British universities, calling for divestment from Israel and an end to arming it. What they need is a unifying slogan. "BDS" (boycott, divestment, sanctions) would be one.

    Protests are bound to spread and be stepped up if the Israeli army assaults Rafah as seems likely.

    I thought that these Hamas apologists already had a slogan. Something about a river and the sea.
    Are you a Netanyahu apologist?
  • Options
    DonkeysDonkeys Posts: 723
    edited May 2

    Donkeys said:

    There are now tent protests at many British universities, calling for divestment from Israel and an end to arming it. What they need is a unifying slogan. "BDS" (boycott, divestment, sanctions) would be one.

    Protests are bound to spread and be stepped up if the Israeli army assaults Rafah as seems likely.

    What monkey sees monkey does.
    What an asinine comment.
    If you knew anything about social psychology, you'd know that good Samaritanism can spread fast once the first person does some. Doesn't apply much to pickpocketing.

    I got an email from one of the universities I'm an alumnus of telling me about the tent protest there. This is clearly expected to spread.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,807
    algarkirk said:

    stodge said:

    stodge said:

    Perhaps least unpopular would be slightly more accurate.

    I see plenty think Starmer will swiftly plumb Sunakian levels of unpopularity once elected. Perhaps even Trussite or Johnsonian marks of unfavourability or it may just be because @isam doesn't like him.

    MY feeling is after the election and presuming Starmer wins big, the vast majority will switch off from politics and just let him get on with it. There are plenty on the Conservative side who said in 1997 people would soon see through "phoney Tony" and the Conservatives would be back - didn't quite work out like that, did it?

    I think Starmer will be a decent Prime Minister certainly by contrast with the no-marks of the last 15 years. He's no Blair and he's no Thatcher of course but that won't stop him doing a decent job and his most serious issues are likely to be internal Labour discipline but if he wins big and takes Labour back to power he'll be afforded plenty of slack.

    Or, he could just be a competent administrator like Sunak that fails to heed the zeitgeist or deliver on expectations and rapidly plumbs the same depths.
    Of course. I think he's set some pretty low expectations so far - he may become more ambitious once elected (or not). I'm not sure what the zeitgeist is but I think you stay closer to it in Opposition than you do in Government and the longer any party stays in Government the further "removed" they get and the louder the accusations of being "out of touch".
    To paraphrase Blair:

    We were elected with no ambition. We will govern with no ambition.

    What would an ambitious Labour manifesto say, and with what generic conclusions, about borrowing, debt, deficit, interest rates, tax and increasing spending?
    We'd be daft to put all that scary stuff in the manifesto. Just crack on with the Socialism once elected.

    And hopefully none of the New Towns shite.
  • Options
    BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,395
    boulay said:

    Cookie said:

    boulay said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    megasaur said:

    Leon said:

    Further thoughts on Paris. It really depends where you go. The left bank is generally much better. The 6th and 7th look fine. Even around Gare Montparnasse it looks civilised

    It’s as soon as you cross the Seine and it’s anywhere in and around the 1st and 2nd, and of course, the Gare du Nord

    I’m about 300m from the Opera and I just saw a guy lying flat out on the bare sidewalk, face down, apparently comatose. Fentanyl or Tranq I presume

    You just didn’t see shit like that 20 years ago. Maybe even 5 years ago

    It’s particularly noticeable in Paris BECAUSE it was once so pristine - and always beautiful. Now she’s like a model that got beaten up and lost three teeth and potentially an eye

    I don't think it would be fent. Even our govt has the good sense to be monitoring the sewage for it and I am sure if the french found it the press would be full of omg le fent en Europe stories

    Excellent piece on what the us drug problem looks like in phoenix Arizona (doubly sad because phoenix Arizona features in the most feel good song ever written)

    https://walkingtheworld.substack.com/p/walking-phoenix
    By The Time I Get To Phoenix?

    That's more of a feel-melancholy song imo. Also a good example of how the vastness and diversity of America gives them such a songwriting advantage.

    By the time I get to Crawley she'll be ... well whatever she'll be doing it doesn't work at all, does it.
    "I never thought it would happen with me & the girl from Clapham..."
    I think the UK has decent songwriting scope. You have the Scottish Highlands, London, (think Baker Street, Waterloo Sunset). Sadly Wales and Cornwall haven't been successfully mined for pop songs.
    London has a lot of songs. Including one of the most beautiful songs ever written:

    A Nightingale Sang In Berkeley Square

    I reckon the Tori Amos version from Good Omens is particularly fine

    https://youtu.be/Q3VchDN_vN8?si=9ej6H9-I65-CQNIZ
    London also has Waterloo Sunset, which I would contend is also one of the most beautiful songs ever written.

    I have a thing about songs written on the vague theme of 'home', even if it's not my own home. See also:

    Local Hero
    Country Road
    Oblong of Dreams
    Wichita Lineman

    Any others?
    “Home” by Edward Sharpe and the magnetic zeros.

    https://youtu.be/DHEOF_rcND8?si=ByQURN_JXpk1vRns

    Hadn't come across that before - though it does sound familiar from somewhere.
    It is a fine song, anyway, and I shall add it to my summer playlist - it sits almost plum in the centre of the Cookie family taste venn diagram.
    A pedant would point out that at first listen it appears to be a love song rather than actually about home ('home is where I'm alone with you' - a fine sentiment, but one which actually hints that geography is unimportant, which is the opposite theme) - though it does have a chord structure hinting at themes of home. Anyway, it's lovely - thank you.
    I'm pretty sure that I introduced PB to that a few months back
    That will be where I got the inspiration to buy the album from in 2010 when it came out. Thanks for the tip.
    As soon as I saw their NPR Music Tiny Desk concert, I posted about it here

    You waited fourteen years, you selfish git
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,400
    Leon said:

    For the first time in many years, I didn't vote!

    Not for lack of trying, my postal vote (which I usually deliver in person) got lost in all my travels

    For the record I would have voted against the awful Khan, dunno who for tho. Possibly binface

    I didn't vote either . First time ever in 52 yrs. I wonder how the non voters will affect the GE when it comes.
  • Options
    legatuslegatus Posts: 126
    edited May 2

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Not to mention that Blair became PM at about the easiest time during the entire 20th century.

    Starmer will have a much harder job in a much more dangerous and unpredictable world.

    GIN1138 said:

    SKS personal ratings are still pretty poor, given the circumstances, IMO.

    This certainly isn't 1997 and he's not being swept into Downing St on a wave of goodwill like Blair was. There will be no years-long honeymoon and I think he'll be a very unpopular Prime Minister within a couple of years, personally.

    Not to mention that Blair became PM at about the easiest time during the entire 20th century.

    Starmer will have a much harder job in a much more dangerous and unpredictable world.
    I disagree. Ted Heath had a better inheritance in June 1970. He was bequeathed both a Balance of Payments surplus and a Fiscal surplus. No departing Tory government since World War 2 has managed either!
This discussion has been closed.