"There is a howling at the moon element at this. The ULEZ formers want to impose their rights to kill people with toxic air - what about the rights of the people being killed or damaged? The 20 mph formers want to kill more pedestrians - what about the rights of the people who don’t want to be killed?"
By that rationale any train or car should be motionless lest they crush someone's foot.
It's perfectly legitimate to advocate a lower speed limit in the name of safety, and equally valid to comment on the economic/personal cost of slower travel times. One side isn't devilish, and the other is most certainly not holy.
The fuss over 20mph in Wales is just weird though. Large swathes of London have been 20mph for a fair while now. You rapidly get used to it.
You could get used to being whipped through the streets in a gimp mask every morning. That wouldn't make it a good and efficient use of your time. It's particularly ludicrous for someone like you, who's incensed by the efficiency loss of (God forbid) using cash, to tell us all how great it is to fart around at 20mph getting nowhere fast, in a bid to protect the hordes of people who were being mown down by people sticking to the 30 limit in less enlightened times.
The evidence in support of default 20mph limits in residential areas is already too strong for it to be rolled back very far, which is why I'm not very worried. Consider even that in England we have 30 years of introducing 20mph schemes, and I can't think of any that have been significantly reversed - can anyone here?
As I see it there are two important changes:
1 - A general reduction in speeds. In Wales monitoring so far demonstrates that the average speed has reduced from 29mph to 25mph, and that 97% of drivers in 20mph zones on main roads are now driving at under 26mph.
That is a huge positive.
2 - Following on, there has been a significant reduction in the more extreme speeders. Those who were previously driving at 35-40 through residential areas will now be doing more like 26-30, which again is a big difference.
There will be some tweaks, but people living and driving places find that they like safer streets / roads where they aren't kept away by risk of intimidation or injury. When reduced KSI data comes out, it will be very persuasive.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
Sorry, but weren’t you one of them?
No, I said at one stage that my view had been changed by the posts on here - and also said at the time (in the same post) that I was almost certainly being irrational. I was certainly influenced by it. But then, in the past, PB has been a generally good guide on election night. Not this time!
We (well, I) are good at collating data and drawing conclusions, and in POTUS or UKGE elections where there is a constant stream of counted votes we can discuss well. But in the gap between the end of the election and the vote counts being released we only have gossip and tittle-tattle and we (well, I) go haywire on a GIGO basis.
In the specific case of LONMAYORAL24 the only info we had was the gossip from various sources, a possible postal vote leak, and the turnout data, all of which were surprisingly favorable for Hall. Given that the only data available suggested a Hall win, the only conclusion was a Hall win. When actual count data came in, it became rapidly obvious that she had lost and PB corrected accordingly.
Lessons to be learned are as follows * We (well, I) am not good at interpreting low-quality data and should not predict until actual count data is available * We are used as a source by Twitter, which is then fed back to us, and we have a feedback loop. So we (well, I), were both cause of and sufferer of the problem * During the low-quality data period it is possible to manipulate the media and Twitter to swing the odds dramatically in such a way to accrue profit from artificially-created value bets. This offers an interesting possibility for betting engineering. * Journalists know f*** all. Wait for the count data.
Considering POTUS24 is six months away, these are good lessons to know now, yes?
I don’t believe you can possibly argue that the only data available pointed to a Hall win. All the data pointed to a Khan win, as others including myself maintained throughout. What we had on the third were some snippets of anecdata, that subsequently turned out to be nonsense (as I said at the time, postal votes are verified face down so claims from postal verifications are almost always rubbish), and some turnout data that was hardly dramatic, and probably explained - if explanation is needed - by some normally non-voters getting off their arses in Outer London to vote for Reform.
The mystery is how Anabob as one of the very first people to have predicted a Hall win (based on nothing, as far as I can see), almost as soon as polls closed, can now be asking how this ridiculous notion arose?
I said I had a feeling that she would win, yes. I also said that that feeling was irrational. But wasn’t the source of the national rumour! There were a series of rumours coming out, expressed in terms of great confidence. Were they from Hall’s camp? If so she is even dumber that we feared: why ramp up expectations?
I’ve answered that above.
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
Redfield and Wilton are polling "in the so-called ‘Blue Wall’ of affluent, southern constituencies where the party has traditionally won, but where its support has been slipping in recent years". These are Remain-orientated constituencies, but with a selection bias towards including ones where the Lib Dems are the main challenger, the threshold for inclusion is either that LDs are within 15,000 votes of the Tories or that Labour is within 10,000 votes of the Tories, so a higher bar for Labour.
The picture from the polling is still one of Labour going forward strongly since 2019 and of the LDs going backwards. The LDs vote share has been below their 2019 vote share in every single one of the R&W polls to date. So while McFadden is of course ramping Labour, I think he is justified in his comments.
Latest R&W Blue Wall polling (28/4/24) with change since GE 2019:
Ironically that could save a few Tory seats in areas like Surrey or Oxfordshire or Chelsea and Fulham where the LDs were second last time if Labour is up at their expense
Redfield and Wilton are polling "in the so-called ‘Blue Wall’ of affluent, southern constituencies where the party has traditionally won, but where its support has been slipping in recent years". These are Remain-orientated constituencies, but with a selection bias towards including ones where the Lib Dems are the main challenger, the threshold for inclusion is either that LDs are within 15,000 votes of the Tories or that Labour is within 10,000 votes of the Tories, so a higher bar for Labour.
The picture from the polling is still one of Labour going forward strongly since 2019 and of the LDs going backwards. The LDs vote share has been below their 2019 vote share in every single one of the R&W polls to date. So while McFadden is of course ramping Labour, I think he is justified in his comments.
Latest R&W Blue Wall polling (28/4/24) with change since GE 2019:
Ironically that could save a few Tory seats in areas like Surrey or Oxfordshire or Chelsea and Fulham where the LDs were second last time if Labour is up at their expense
In quite a few seats Labour is likely to jump from 3rd place to win the seat.
I don't think they will, on the basis the Lib Dems just aren't second in that many places and, where they are, they will either have very strong operations to hammer home the tactical message, or the Tories will just be so far ahead of everyone else that the best Labour can realistically get is second.
There are a couple of exceptions in seats where ex-ChangeUK people ran for the Lib Dems, and I'm not including Scotland where they may well beat the SNP from third over the Tories or from the Tories over the SNP.
Voti g in Epping Forest, I had 9 votes over three papers. I could only vote labour twice. Not wishing to waste votes I voted green 6 times. What does that sat about Thrashers calculations?
Voti g in Epping Forest, I had 9 votes over three papers. I could only vote labour twice. Not wishing to waste votes I voted green 6 times. What does that sat about Thrashers calculations?
Excusable as there was no Plaid Cymru choice available, I suppose?
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
I think you get jitters in that it's third time around, Labour often loses etc. but the polls point to one direction and they are rarely wrong. So although I had "internal" jitters, I did not feel that the actual data we had contradicted them. It is slightly baffling to me that intelligent people on PB did when they haven't before.
"A meeting in the last fortnight between the prime minister and two grandees from the party’s right wing – Sir John Hayes and Sir Edward Leigh – saw Mr Sunak being pushed to become more right wing if he wanted to stay as prime minister."
"(...)it was noted that he moved to appease the right ahead of the local elections by pushing through his controversial Rwanda bill to allow deportations of asylum seekers to east Africa. He then authorised the filming of asylum seekers being rounded up into vans, just ahead of polling day."
"On Saturday, Sir John publicly backed the prime minister to keep his job following that particular stunt, and claimed that the images of asylum seekers being rounded up for deportation 'ensured that we held on to seats we would have otherwise lost'.
He said: 'We need half a dozen more headlines like that and then we can win again.'"
John Hayes - now there is someone who understands politics.
As well as rounding up non-white immigrants and throwing them into vans for deportation, there's also the trouble on the campuses. This will grow when Israel assaults Rafah. From the right wing point of view, you therefore get
* the government beginning to turn things around (throwing immigrants into vans)
* a growing problem on the campuses involving "the usual suspects" - non-whites wearing Arab scarves, a few white lefties doing the same, people shouting about "Jenny Cider" or something like that - oh how tiresome - but clearly unBritish types being unBritishly angry and disruptive and requiring an introduction to an iron fist, to put them back where they came from in all senses. "My son worked hard for his degree - now he doesn't know what he'll do, now the exams were cancelled because of the Khamass protests", etc.
* the call for action: want a government that continues to face up to the problem and solves it? Then you're going to have to do something, namely vote Tory.
Imagine, just imagine if they can LINK immigration to trouble-makers on campuses. This is practically an open goal for Tory racists. Most illegal immigrants don't come here on small boats - they come here legally on visas and overstay. And many visa schemes, on paper, involve "education". They could even raid a college or two. They could arrest protestors and, lo and behold, find that one of them is an illegal immigrant - here's a photo of him with a banner saying "Free Gaza" - or in a gang that arranged for student visas for 703 people, 596 of whom have overstayed. Powerful stuff.
They'll probably have to replace Sunak first, but I'm sure that's a solvable problem.
Save this post.
Wow - John Hayes, MP for South Holland and the Deepings! He has increased his voteshare in each of the past six general elections.
The Tory Party as a whole has done that, so probably many Tory MPs have.
What goes up eventually comes down though and it looks like the past six will be reversed in one motion, and maybe then some too, at the next election.
Wow - so it has. That's an amazing statistic.
Hayes probably still stands out though. 1997: 49.3%; 2019: 75.9%
Tories as a whole: 1997: 30.7%; 2019: 43.6%
Some of that is because it was strongly leave but it's interesting to note that the biggest Tory majorities used to be in South Coast places like Worthing and Adur and Hove.
It’s frightening, isn’t it? And surely, surely Lord Denning’s, appalling remarks in the Birmingham six case should be well known all student lawyers.
Mm, quite so. An interesting header. No idea how they teach student lawyers, but case studies of failures and disasters seem to be very much par for the course in engineering and aeronautics. Yet we learn that "the history of miscarriages of justice is not a topic much taught to aspiring or practising lawyers".
My impression from the outside is that lawyers are taught how to win, how to argue a weak case. It's one reason why we've ended up with so many of the legal profession in our politics at the moment.
Because even a guilty criminal should have legal representation there's an acceptance of being on the "wrong" side of a case, and this necessarily blurs the moral boundaries when it comes to breaking rules on things like disclosure in pursuit of the imperative to win the case.
If lawyer training went too hard into questions of the morally of what they should do, then you'd find it a lot harder to find legal representation for murderers, rapists and the like.
In some areas of Britain we are now witnessing the rise of a darker, tribal, more sectarian politics which, ironically, is emerging under the banner of the so-called ‘liberal progressive’ Greens"
I am no longer confident about my July bet, Rishi is going to let this run and run isn't he?
I think we should take Sunak at his word; "The second half of the year", and I do think he has a date already in mind. It wont be July or August and I think he wants to use the conference season, where the Tories go last this year, as the platform to launch his pitch. I therefore think we will see him announce the date on the last day of the Tory Party conference, which is October 2nd. I suspect he wants quite a long campaign ("events, dear boy, events") so I think it is in the range of the three weeks up to and including Thursday December 12th, which is exactly 5 years since Boris´s own triumph, however pyrrhic it has turned out to be.
January screws Christmas and just looks desperate, So end of November/early December for me and if pushed, then December 12th.
I am no longer confident about my July bet, Rishi is going to let this run and run isn't he?
I think we should take Sunak at his word; "The second half of the year", and I do think he has a date already in mind. It wont be July or August and I think he wants to use the conference season, where the Tories go last this year, as the platform to launch his pitch. I therefore think we will see him announce the date on the last day of the Tory Party conference, which is October 2nd. I suspect he wants quite a long campaign ("events, dear boy, events") so I think it is in the range of the three weeks up to and including Thursday December 12th, which is exactly 5 years since Boris´s own triumph, however pyrrhic it has turned out to be.
January screws Christmas and just looks desperate, So end of November/early December for me and if pushed, then December 12th.
December in 2019 was not Johnson's preferred month for a GE . He had made two unsuccessful attempts earlier in the Autumn but been blocked by the FTPA rules.
As I recall, it was the SNP’s choice, which first the LibDem and then Labour fell for?
When the LDs agreed to support the SNP on the election timing Labour was no longer in a position to block it.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
Sorry, but weren’t you one of them?
No, I said at one stage that my view had been changed by the posts on here - and also said at the time (in the same post) that I was almost certainly being irrational. I was certainly influenced by it. But then, in the past, PB has been a generally good guide on election night. Not this time!
We (well, I) are good at collating data and drawing conclusions, and in POTUS or UKGE elections where there is a constant stream of counted votes we can discuss well. But in the gap between the end of the election and the vote counts being released we only have gossip and tittle-tattle and we (well, I) go haywire on a GIGO basis.
In the specific case of LONMAYORAL24 the only info we had was the gossip from various sources, a possible postal vote leak, and the turnout data, all of which were surprisingly favorable for Hall. Given that the only data available suggested a Hall win, the only conclusion was a Hall win. When actual count data came in, it became rapidly obvious that she had lost and PB corrected accordingly.
Lessons to be learned are as follows * We (well, I) am not good at interpreting low-quality data and should not predict until actual count data is available * We are used as a source by Twitter, which is then fed back to us, and we have a feedback loop. So we (well, I), were both cause of and sufferer of the problem * During the low-quality data period it is possible to manipulate the media and Twitter to swing the odds dramatically in such a way to accrue profit from artificially-created value bets. This offers an interesting possibility for betting engineering. * Journalists know f*** all. Wait for the count data.
Considering POTUS24 is six months away, these are good lessons to know now, yes?
I don’t believe you can possibly argue that the only data available pointed to a Hall win. All the data pointed to a Khan win, as others including myself maintained throughout. What we had on the third were some snippets of anecdata, that subsequently turned out to be nonsense (as I said at the time, postal votes are verified face down so claims from postal verifications are almost always rubbish), and some turnout data that was hardly dramatic, and probably explained - if explanation is needed - by some normally non-voters getting off their arses in Outer London to vote for Reform.
The mystery is how Anabob as one of the very first people to have predicted a Hall win (based on nothing, as far as I can see), almost as soon as polls closed, can now be asking how this ridiculous notion arose?
I said I had a feeling that she would win, yes. I also said that that feeling was irrational. But wasn’t the source of the national rumour! There were a series of rumours coming out, expressed in terms of great confidence. Were they from Hall’s camp? If so she is even dumber that we feared: why ramp up expectations?
I’ve answered that above.
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
I’m embarrassed that I got sucked in. But just wondered who created the original rumour.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
Sorry, but weren’t you one of them?
No, I said at one stage that my view had been changed by the posts on here - and also said at the time (in the same post) that I was almost certainly being irrational. I was certainly influenced by it. But then, in the past, PB has been a generally good guide on election night. Not this time!
We (well, I) are good at collating data and drawing conclusions, and in POTUS or UKGE elections where there is a constant stream of counted votes we can discuss well. But in the gap between the end of the election and the vote counts being released we only have gossip and tittle-tattle and we (well, I) go haywire on a GIGO basis.
In the specific case of LONMAYORAL24 the only info we had was the gossip from various sources, a possible postal vote leak, and the turnout data, all of which were surprisingly favorable for Hall. Given that the only data available suggested a Hall win, the only conclusion was a Hall win. When actual count data came in, it became rapidly obvious that she had lost and PB corrected accordingly.
Lessons to be learned are as follows * We (well, I) am not good at interpreting low-quality data and should not predict until actual count data is available * We are used as a source by Twitter, which is then fed back to us, and we have a feedback loop. So we (well, I), were both cause of and sufferer of the problem * During the low-quality data period it is possible to manipulate the media and Twitter to swing the odds dramatically in such a way to accrue profit from artificially-created value bets. This offers an interesting possibility for betting engineering. * Journalists know f*** all. Wait for the count data.
Considering POTUS24 is six months away, these are good lessons to know now, yes?
I don’t believe you can possibly argue that the only data available pointed to a Hall win. All the data pointed to a Khan win, as others including myself maintained throughout. What we had on the third were some snippets of anecdata, that subsequently turned out to be nonsense (as I said at the time, postal votes are verified face down so claims from postal verifications are almost always rubbish), and some turnout data that was hardly dramatic, and probably explained - if explanation is needed - by some normally non-voters getting off their arses in Outer London to vote for Reform.
The mystery is how Anabob as one of the very first people to have predicted a Hall win (based on nothing, as far as I can see), almost as soon as polls closed, can now be asking how this ridiculous notion arose?
Partly it's the difference in brain wiring that correlates a bit with which political instincts. An overfocus on what can go wrong makes socialism attractive, an underfocus does the same for libertarian capitalism. See the way that Blair and Starmer have trod the path to Number Ten- incredibly cautiously. You wouldn't get a Tory doing that; at their best, that optimism one of their attractive features.
One of the lessons of the last week is to ignore what party sources say, especially when it's not obvious what their basis is for saying it. The "turnout is up/down in the right places" stuff was clearly made up, but we all swallowed it a bit.
What is worth looking at is what the parties are doing. In London, Hall's campaign was obviously low-energy compared with Johnson's wins. That ought to have been a clue that she wasn't on track to win. Similarly, Labour's move of activists from Teesside to the West Midlands was a pretty good indication of where the front line of the election was.
Not much sunny optimism on ConHome. https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/05/goodbyeee/ … Half our council seats – and twelve authorities – gone. Third place behind the Liberal Democrats. Eleven mayoral races lost out of twelve. Due to the lethargic way in which the results were counted, the true extent of the pain has almost been dulled. The more one considers it, the more it seems the anti-Sunak lot stood down too early. Weren’t these the results they were hoping for?
Yet the fight seems to have gone out of the rebels. Jenkyns, Simon Clarke, and Suella Braverman – all persistent Sunak critics – have called for mythical “policy changes”, but not demand an immediate resignation. The hope amongst some is that Sunak can own the coming loss, allowing the right to swoop in post-election. The flaw in their logic is that it relies on keeping their seats.
But it’s hard to see what, say, installing Penny Mordaunt as a boat-stopping, strike-breaking, ocean-going vehicle of electoral salvation might achieve. It would rely on HMS Sword-Carrier not only being able to appease both the party’s left and right, but mimic Johnson in 2019, except without Vote Leave, the benefit of the doubt, or the overwhelming need to Get Brexit Done.
There’s nothing to stop the Prime Minister’s critics from buying ad space in the Telegraph to print “WE TOLD YOU SO” in big friendly letters. But one doesn’t sense the appetite for crowing. As with Blackadder accepting his appalling fate, there is a widespread air of resignation. Our survey and suggests the general assumption is that Sunak going would only make things worse. Our time is up.
The big push can only be avoided for so long. In a year, the Prime Minister has brought the party precisely nowhere. Even those once optimistic that he could be Johnson but competent have lost the appetite. Reboots have rung hollow. We are 20 points behind and commanding under a fifth of the vote. Rwanda is a dud, Farage will return, and the voters are miserable. Why cling on?
There will be no cunning plans. Notwithstanding the ability of Tory MPs to shoot themselves in the foot, it seems that Sunak has done terribly enough to have earnt the right to lead us slowly towards the guns later this year at the head of his denuded infantry. Our former Editor once wrote of our party in a Totentanz – a dance of death. This will be a slow, painful, and hopeless march...
For some unaccountable reason this reminds me of my current reading: the Franklin expedition. Marching hundreds of miles south from where their ships Terror and Erebus were stuck in the ice. Shedding corpses and skeletons, and latterly eating each other, all over the Arctic, and the last few dying in and around a ship's boat dragged all the way.
The surprise of the decade would be if the Tories turn this into Shackleton's expedition instead of Franklin's.
It’s frightening, isn’t it? And surely, surely Lord Denning’s, appalling remarks in the Birmingham six case should be well known all student lawyers.
Mm, quite so. An interesting header. No idea how they teach student lawyers, but case studies of failures and disasters seem to be very much par for the course in engineering and aeronautics. Yet we learn that "the history of miscarriages of justice is not a topic much taught to aspiring or practising lawyers".
My impression from the outside is that lawyers are taught how to win, how to argue a weak case. It's one reason why we've ended up with so many of the legal profession in our politics at the moment.
Because even a guilty criminal should have legal representation there's an acceptance of being on the "wrong" side of a case, and this necessarily blurs the moral boundaries when it comes to breaking rules on things like disclosure in pursuit of the imperative to win the case.
If lawyer training went too hard into questions of the morally of what they should do, then you'd find it a lot harder to find legal representation for murderers, rapists and the like.
That isn’t my experience of lawyer training.
Professional Conduct is a massive part of it.
The excuse that "morality is a disadvantage for lawyers" is the classic excuse for corruption among lawyers. That "we are here just to win".
There is a vast raft of philosophical and moral (and legal) arguments as to why lawyers (complete with morals and a conscience) should defend a client to the best of their ability. There is an also a vast raft of philosophical, moral and legal ruling on where the limits are.
The Post Office lawyers broke the law in a number of ways. They hid evidence, and lied about hiding evidence, from the courts.
Labour's lead over the Tories is down to just 7%, according to an updated National Equivalent Vote estimate.
Sky Elections Analyst Prof Michael Thrasher says Labour's lead needs to be double that to secure a majority. @skynews
Oh come on . That didn’t include any changes in the vote in Scotland and Wales .
It also didn't take into account the wards which didn't have all the major parties represented. I think election maps could only find 197 wards.
I was rather reminded of the "just a bit of fun" projections Peter Snow used to do, showing Paddy Ashdown or whoever marching into Number 10 after winning some by-election or other.
Ultimately these local elections, like the last ones, showed people finding the best way to beat the Tories in their tiny corner of the world, and taking it. Will the Lib Dem, Green or Independent votes in individual wards in Labour target seats be repeated on a comparable scale in a General Election? No chance. Similarly with anti-Tory votes in Lib Dem target seats.
I quite like Michael Thrasher, and it isn't totally illegitimate to just take some objectively true raw numbers, unfiltered by what I'd call "common sense" but someone else might call "unverified assumption", and make a "bit of fun" projection. But he does have something of a professional interest in making the election feel less of a foregone conclusion than it is.
There's also the point that the national vote might look much more like the local one under a system of PR. I'm sick of being told that any vote not for one of the two largest parties is a "wasted" vote, but the argument, undemocratic as it is, has an undeniable force.
In some areas of Britain we are now witnessing the rise of a darker, tribal, more sectarian politics which, ironically, is emerging under the banner of the so-called ‘liberal progressive’ Greens"
Some of the Hamas apologists were indeed standing for the Green Party.
My sympathies with those environmentalists who have stuck with the party but look at it with despair.
There's a major reckoning coming for the Green Party.
There are quite a lot of sensible Green councillors looking to improve environmental policies in their local area and support a party with such policies on a national level - you can disagree on specifics, but it's all perfectly sane stuff within the bounds of normal politics. They've done well and the Green base in local government is now really quite impressive.
Then there are incredibly dubious entryists, and increasing numbers of those, that the Green Party nationally has done little to address as they see growth of the base as everything and don't look too hard at what that base contains. But it will really bite them hard - it will feed through to voters, and the councillors themselves will ask if they want to be associated with it, or would prefer to throw their hand in with another party or just walk away.
… This is such an appalling vista that every sensible person in the land would say that it cannot be right that these actions should go any further…
I wonder what every sensible person in the land would say to Lord Denning today ?
The arrogant old pillock.
I'd say that statement might well be the most terrifying thing said by a public figure in the last few decades. The mindset it reveals is unfathomable.
Lord Denning also came out with this racist crap in 1982:
The English are no longer a homogeneous race. They are white and black, coloured and brown. They no longer share the same standards of conduct. Some of them come from countries where bribery and graft are accepted as an integral part of life and where stealing is a virtue so long as you are not found out… They will never accept the word of a policeman against one of their own.
So basically, they were like the English aristocracy?
Ironically he was from a very ordinary background.
Just an FYI, MoonRabbit has predicted an election for the 4th July, to be called 13th May, so might be wise to lay a July election on historical trends.
In some areas of Britain we are now witnessing the rise of a darker, tribal, more sectarian politics which, ironically, is emerging under the banner of the so-called ‘liberal progressive’ Greens"
Some of the Hamas apologists were indeed standing for the Green Party.
My sympathies with those environmentalists who have stuck with the party but look at it with despair.
There's a major reckoning coming for the Green Party.
There are quite a lot of sensible Green councillors looking to improve environmental policies in their local area and support a party with such policies on a national level - you can disagree on specifics, but it's all perfectly sane stuff within the bounds of normal politics. They've done well and the Green base in local government is now really quite impressive.
Then there are incredibly dubious entryists, and increasing numbers of those, that the Green Party nationally has done little to address as they see growth of the base as everything and don't look too hard at what that base contains. But it will really bite them hard - it will feed through to voters, and the councillors themselves will ask if they want to be associated with it, or would prefer to throw their hand in with another party or just walk away.
What has happened is that the nutters from Labour have gone to the Greens.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
They just following the GOP play-back, claim victory early and loudly and if the result is close cry foul play.
Whilst it's deeply ironic to see Anabobazina posting this as they were one of the people most on the "Hall will win train", they are right.
This site was really very bad and seemed to throw any sense or logic out of the window. The site has been very restrained, professional and objective before, so it was quite odd to see.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
Sorry, but weren’t you one of them?
No, I said at one stage that my view had been changed by the posts on here - and also said at the time (in the same post) that I was almost certainly being irrational. I was certainly influenced by it. But then, in the past, PB has been a generally good guide on election night. Not this time!
We (well, I) are good at collating data and drawing conclusions, and in POTUS or UKGE elections where there is a constant stream of counted votes we can discuss well. But in the gap between the end of the election and the vote counts being released we only have gossip and tittle-tattle and we (well, I) go haywire on a GIGO basis.
In the specific case of LONMAYORAL24 the only info we had was the gossip from various sources, a possible postal vote leak, and the turnout data, all of which were surprisingly favorable for Hall. Given that the only data available suggested a Hall win, the only conclusion was a Hall win. When actual count data came in, it became rapidly obvious that she had lost and PB corrected accordingly.
Lessons to be learned are as follows * We (well, I) am not good at interpreting low-quality data and should not predict until actual count data is available * We are used as a source by Twitter, which is then fed back to us, and we have a feedback loop. So we (well, I), were both cause of and sufferer of the problem * During the low-quality data period it is possible to manipulate the media and Twitter to swing the odds dramatically in such a way to accrue profit from artificially-created value bets. This offers an interesting possibility for betting engineering. * Journalists know f*** all. Wait for the count data.
Considering POTUS24 is six months away, these are good lessons to know now, yes?
I don’t believe you can possibly argue that the only data available pointed to a Hall win. All the data pointed to a Khan win, as others including myself maintained throughout. What we had on the third were some snippets of anecdata, that subsequently turned out to be nonsense (as I said at the time, postal votes are verified face down so claims from postal verifications are almost always rubbish), and some turnout data that was hardly dramatic, and probably explained - if explanation is needed - by some normally non-voters getting off their arses in Outer London to vote for Reform.
The mystery is how Anabob as one of the very first people to have predicted a Hall win (based on nothing, as far as I can see), almost as soon as polls closed, can now be asking how this ridiculous notion arose?
I said I had a feeling that she would win, yes. I also said that that feeling was irrational. But wasn’t the source of the national rumour! There were a series of rumours coming out, expressed in terms of great confidence. Were they from Hall’s camp? If so she is even dumber that we feared: why ramp up expectations?
I’ve answered that above.
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
I’m embarrassed that I got sucked in. But just wondered who created the original rumour.
To be fair to you, wasn't your primary piece of evidence that your wife 'forgot to vote', and you rather wildly over-extrapolated from this?
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
Voti g in Epping Forest, I had 9 votes over three papers. I could only vote labour twice. Not wishing to waste votes I voted green 6 times. What does that sat about Thrashers calculations?
Voti g in Epping Forest, I had 9 votes over three papers. I could only vote labour twice. Not wishing to waste votes I voted green 6 times. What does that sat about Thrashers calculations?
Excusable as there was no Plaid Cymru choice available, I suppose?
You assume there was no Plaid Cymru candidate in Epping Forest but in a survey carried out by the Tories in Guildford they asked how did you vote last time and how will you vote next time and under both there were Plaid Cymru options
These nationalists are either getting above themselves or ambitious*
(* or are the Tories using generic literature I wonder )
"There is a howling at the moon element at this. The ULEZ formers want to impose their rights to kill people with toxic air - what about the rights of the people being killed or damaged? The 20 mph formers want to kill more pedestrians - what about the rights of the people who don’t want to be killed?"
By that rationale any train or car should be motionless lest they crush someone's foot.
It's perfectly legitimate to advocate a lower speed limit in the name of safety, and equally valid to comment on the economic/personal cost of slower travel times. One side isn't devilish, and the other is most certainly not holy.
The fuss over 20mph in Wales is just weird though. Large swathes of London have been 20mph for a fair while now. You rapidly get used to it.
You could get used to being whipped through the streets in a gimp mask every morning. That wouldn't make it a good and efficient use of your time. It's particularly ludicrous for someone like you, who's incensed by the efficiency loss of (God forbid) using cash, to tell us all how great it is to fart around at 20mph getting nowhere fast, in a bid to protect the hordes of people who were being mown down by people sticking to the 30 limit in less enlightened times.
The evidence in support of default 20mph limits in residential areas is already too strong for it to be rolled back very far, which is why I'm not very worried. Consider even that in England we have 30 years of introducing 20mph schemes, and I can't think of any that have been significantly reversed - can anyone here?
As I see it there are two important changes:
1 - A general reduction in speeds. In Wales monitoring so far demonstrates that the average speed has reduced from 29mph to 25mph, and that 97% of drivers in 20mph zones on main roads are now driving at under 26mph.
That is a huge positive.
2 - Following on, there has been a significant reduction in the more extreme speeders. Those who were previously driving at 35-40 through residential areas will now be doing more like 26-30, which again is a big difference.
There will be some tweaks, but people living and driving places find that they like safer streets / roads where they aren't kept away by risk of intimidation or injury. When reduced KSI data comes out, it will be very persuasive.
It's a direction of travel - pun intended. It will be reversed when there are fairly profound societal and political realisations.
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
They just following the GOP play-back, claim victory early and loudly and if the result is close cry foul play.
Whilst it's deeply ironic to see Anabobazina posting this as they were one of the people most on the "Hall will win train", they are right.
This site was really very bad and seemed to throw any sense or logic out of the window. The site has been very restrained, professional and objective before, so it was quite odd to see.
Cheers but I’m he, not they!
@BatteryCorrectHorse Cheers but I’m he, not they! Yes. I got it wrong and allowed my jitters to overcome me. But there were entire essays on here explaining why Khan had lost, luxuriating in the detail. Reading it all back now is deeply embarrassing.
Labour's lead over the Tories is down to just 7%, according to an updated National Equivalent Vote estimate.
Sky Elections Analyst Prof Michael Thrasher says Labour's lead needs to be double that to secure a majority. @skynews
Oh come on . That didn’t include any changes in the vote in Scotland and Wales .
It also didn't take into account the wards which didn't have all the major parties represented. I think election maps could only find 197 wards.
I was rather reminded of the "just a bit of fun" projections Peter Snow used to do, showing Paddy Ashdown or whoever marching into Number 10 after winning some by-election or other.
Ultimately these local elections, like the last ones, showed people finding the best way to beat the Tories in their tiny corner of the world, and taking it. Will the Lib Dem, Green or Independent votes in individual wards in Labour target seats be repeated on a comparable scale in a General Election? No chance. Similarly with anti-Tory votes in Lib Dem target seats.
I quite like Michael Thrasher, and it isn't totally illegitimate to just take some objectively true raw numbers, unfiltered by what I'd call "common sense" but someone else might call "unverified assumption", and make a "bit of fun" projection. But he does have something of a professional interest in making the election feel less of a foregone conclusion than it is.
There's also the point that the national vote might look much more like the local one under a system of PR. I'm sick of being told that any vote not for one of the two largest parties is a "wasted" vote, but the argument, undemocratic as it is, has an undeniable force.
That's what's really hard to unpick from raw data without making strong assumptions. How far are the Labour, Lib Dem, Green and Other votes actually "anything but Tory" tactical votes and how far are they exactly what it says on the tin? I mean, you could imagine a situation where the Tories were a bit unpopular, so quite a few people have a little protest with those nice Lib Dems, Greens or Independents, but see Labour as beyond the pale and will return to the fold on the big day.
On the doorsteps, I think the answer to that is pretty clear, it's a resounding "get the bastards out", and it's where the Thrasher projection goes badly awry. But, in fairness to him, he could say that he's just working on the voting data rather than my canvas data or unverified assertion as to what I reckon voters are saying.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
Sorry, but weren’t you one of them?
No, I said at one stage that my view had been changed by the posts on here - and also said at the time (in the same post) that I was almost certainly being irrational. I was certainly influenced by it. But then, in the past, PB has been a generally good guide on election night. Not this time!
We (well, I) are good at collating data and drawing conclusions, and in POTUS or UKGE elections where there is a constant stream of counted votes we can discuss well. But in the gap between the end of the election and the vote counts being released we only have gossip and tittle-tattle and we (well, I) go haywire on a GIGO basis.
In the specific case of LONMAYORAL24 the only info we had was the gossip from various sources, a possible postal vote leak, and the turnout data, all of which were surprisingly favorable for Hall. Given that the only data available suggested a Hall win, the only conclusion was a Hall win. When actual count data came in, it became rapidly obvious that she had lost and PB corrected accordingly.
Lessons to be learned are as follows * We (well, I) am not good at interpreting low-quality data and should not predict until actual count data is available * We are used as a source by Twitter, which is then fed back to us, and we have a feedback loop. So we (well, I), were both cause of and sufferer of the problem * During the low-quality data period it is possible to manipulate the media and Twitter to swing the odds dramatically in such a way to accrue profit from artificially-created value bets. This offers an interesting possibility for betting engineering. * Journalists know f*** all. Wait for the count data.
Considering POTUS24 is six months away, these are good lessons to know now, yes?
I don’t believe you can possibly argue that the only data available pointed to a Hall win. All the data pointed to a Khan win, as others including myself maintained throughout. What we had on the third were some snippets of anecdata, that subsequently turned out to be nonsense (as I said at the time, postal votes are verified face down so claims from postal verifications are almost always rubbish), and some turnout data that was hardly dramatic, and probably explained - if explanation is needed - by some normally non-voters getting off their arses in Outer London to vote for Reform.
The mystery is how Anabob as one of the very first people to have predicted a Hall win (based on nothing, as far as I can see), almost as soon as polls closed, can now be asking how this ridiculous notion arose?
I said I had a feeling that she would win, yes. I also said that that feeling was irrational. But wasn’t the source of the national rumour! There were a series of rumours coming out, expressed in terms of great confidence. Were they from Hall’s camp? If so she is even dumber that we feared: why ramp up expectations?
I’ve answered that above.
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
I’m embarrassed that I got sucked in. But just wondered who created the original rumour.
To be fair to you, wasn't your primary piece of evidence that your wife 'forgot to vote', and you rather wildly over-extrapolated from this?
Indeed so. It gave me massive jitters that a lifelong Labour voter who is normally a reliable voter not only forgot to vote but didn’t think it a sufficient risk to necessitate scurrying to the polling station just before it closed. It was a silly thing to base my jitters on but I did at least say clearly on here I was being irrational!
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
There must be an exception for those. It would be ridiculous not to have one.
What the legislation appear to say is that
- If you only have space for a single universal toilet (self contained room) that's fine. - If you have more space, you need to provide single sex facilities.
My husband, who has been campaigning for a proper West Coast Cycle Path round here for ages, met the author for the book and is quoted in the Lake District section. Our dog also features!
It is one of those improvements which would make life so much nicer in a number of ways and yet every authority you encounter to try and get something done is in "computer says no" mode. The only one who has helped at all - and has been effective - is the MP for Barrow, Simon Fell, and he is likely to lose his seat.
I've was chatting to Laura about that on Twitter last month, and I'm waiting for it to come out (late May?). I wanted to make sure that she is doing her bit to promote a +ve image of the National Cycling and Walking Network, which in general is improving.
Sustrans really are heroes. Back in 2018 they did a survey under their "Paths for Everyone" project and found that their 13000 miles of cycling/walking network had 16,000 inaccessible barriers on it. They only own about 1% of it so it is difficult.
They did a Thrain of Erebor sort of "this cannot be borne" moment (see the dwarf/goblin wars), and are now removing or redesigning them at a rate of around 400 per year, and have pruned the network back to give a higher general quality.
But it's a struggle, with Councils whacking barriers on unlawfully without thought.
I like the design, and she may join my favourite cycling author's list alongside Carlton Reid - who is a social historian / journo who did "Roads were not Built for Cars" and 'Britain's Lost Cycletracks' *.
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
Not that much Parliamentary time left though, even if the election is December.
The Tories bang on about Socialist Governments interfering in peoples lives. Tories stop interfering. There are loads of places that have (a) universal loo(s) and they work just fine. You are just creating bureaucracy. Do something useful.
Morning all. On reading through the last thread, some thoughts on Thrashergate. I think it was Wulfrun Phil who posted some polling evidence from 2023 locals of GE VI being wider than LE VI. Whilst that is indeed a piece of supporting evidence, some caution needs applying in that the LE question was about an election about to happen (minds made up) and the GE is, as with all opinion polling between terms, about a date far off not yet defined and, as such, it becomes to some extent a measure of dissatisfaction and with more DKs than likely once minds focussed. Differential weighting would also apply given turnout expectations in both type of election which complicates a dual question poll. So, whilst it does suggest support that at a GE the gap might be wider, putting a figure on it you can rely on is too tricky (and admittedly might be more than 7 or 8% as those polls showed as well as less). Reliance on opinion polling cost May dearly - she continued to focus on places she was getting nowhere near whereas Labour were far more canny and reactive to the ground shifting. The 5 million votes just cast give us a good generic overview of where we stand - somewhat worse for the blues than the Thrasher NEV (which is just a projection of votes cast, not a forecast of votes to come) and somewhat better than the current opinion polling average, the art for the party strategists will be defining just where the line is right now. I'd say about a 10 to 12 point lead for Labour if we voted tomorrow. Tactical voting - complicated this time due to boundary changes and imo likely to favour Labour not the LDs as the spectacular opinion poll leads and the seat forecast polls are making Labour look competitive everywhere. Thus we might end up with some (not by any means loads though) seats looking like 1983 - with a big third place vote because the 'tactical' shot was the wrong one
Beneath Thrasher there is the valid bigger picture point that there is little enthusiasm for Labour, and the locals show that people are willing to shop elsewhere when alternatives are available and credible.
But it’s a shame that his analysis seems to have compounded a number of errors. Firstly, assuming no change in Scotland and Wales, when in the former at least all the evidence points to significant change. Secondly, by what they’ve done with the ‘others’ - seven other gains doesn’t seem credibly the result of any UNS model unless it’s a simplistic one that treats voters for the disparate range of other parties as one bloc backing a single candidate, which is obvious nonsense. Otherwise where are these seven other gains in England? Thirdly, by dropping local voters into a national model without any adjustment, when we all know people vote differently in local elections and the LDs in particular pick up local votes thay they never get in a GE.
And the gross error is that, while the national government and national Tory politicians are widely despised, not all voters punish their local councils and councillors accordingly, especially where they’re doing a reasonable job.
The only counter-argument is that Reform didn’t put up many LE candidates but presumably in the Genny Lec will stand everywhere? Thus potentially syphoning off more unhappy Tories. But that could be balanced off by some who are telling pollsters they are Reform voters as a protest but won’t actually carry through.
That's all fair comment and the NEV has been grossly abused no doubt. If Reform are being overstated in polling as seems likely then we are not a million miles away from a low 40s high 20s scenario perhaps. Something in the 10 to 14 point lead range - enough for a pretty comprehensive win through to Blair styley. I still fancy about a 90 seat majority. One other factor - Galloway standing everywhere (he says, he's already got 150 in place though). As we saw with Yakoob in West Midlands, he picked up 60,000 votes and only announced five weeks ago standing on a gaza ticket. They need to start prompting WPB in polling, if he's at 1% or no show then forget it, but if they start hitting 3% then he becomes a complicating factor. Where they stood Thursday they generally did pretty well. Blackburn, Rochdale, Halifax, Oldham, Birmingham etc could be interesting.
London gives a perfect dry run of how Conservatives v Reform would likely pan out in the general election. Reform contested every available seat, against the Conservatives, and they did not make much of an inroad into their vote.
They may have prevented the Conservatives from flipping Ealing/Hillingdon, but that was about it.
The Conservatives will pick up some of the vote that went to independents, in general election conditions, probably enough to get above 30%+, but I agree that Labour are more than 7% ahead, when it comes to the GE/
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
I think you get jitters in that it's third time around, Labour often loses etc. but the polls point to one direction and they are rarely wrong. So although I had "internal" jitters, I did not feel that the actual data we had contradicted them. It is slightly baffling to me that intelligent people on PB did when they haven't before.
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
Not that much Parliamentary time left though, even if the election is December.
The Tories bang on about Socialist Governments interfering in peoples lives. Tories stop interfering. There are loads of places that have (a) universal loo(s) and they work just fine. You are just creating bureaucracy. Do something useful.
They have to have something to do till they get booted out
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
I think you get jitters in that it's third time around, Labour often loses etc. but the polls point to one direction and they are rarely wrong. So although I had "internal" jitters, I did not feel that the actual data we had contradicted them. It is slightly baffling to me that intelligent people on PB did when they haven't before.
Brcause they want the Tories to win
I think that’s certainly true of some of them: they were wishcasting in great detail about why Khan had lost, for long periods of the evening. It makes embarrassing reading.
My husband, who has been campaigning for a proper West Coast Cycle Path round here for ages, met the author for the book and is quoted in the Lake District section. Our dog also features!
It is one of those improvements which would make life so much nicer in a number of ways and yet every authority you encounter to try and get something done is in "computer says no" mode. The only one who has helped at all - and has been effective - is the MP for Barrow, Simon Fell, and he is likely to lose his seat.
I've was chatting to Laura about that on Twitter last month, and I'm waiting for it to come out (late May?). I wanted to make sure that she is doing her bit to promote a +ve image of the National Cycling and Walking Network, which in general is improving.
Sustrans really are heroes. Back in 2018 they did a survey under their "Paths for Everyone" project and found that their 13000 miles of cycling/walking network had 16,000 inaccessible barriers on it. They only own about 1% of it so it is difficult.
They did a Thrain of Erebor sort of "this cannot be borne" moment (see the dwarf/goblin wars), and are now removing or redesigning them at a rate of around 400 per year, and have pruned the network back to give a higher general quality.
But it's a struggle, with Councils whacking barriers on unlawfully without thought.
I like the design, and she may join my favourite cycling author's list alongside Carlton Reid - who is a social historian / journo who did "Roads were not Built for Cars" and 'Britain's Lost Cycletracks' *.
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
She sounds like she’s talking about an ex-husband she bitterly despises after hearing that he’s back on the local dating scene.
Laura K is descending even lower. How did she ever get this job?
I'm not a fan of hers at all, but think this one is a bit unfair.
In that clip, she's describing what the Labour PR strategy is in terms of softening the technocratic, elitist image Starmer has by sticking him in mid-priced casuals and sending him out to normal, unglamorous places.
It's not particularly groundbreaking journalism - yes, that's quite a common strategy when your candidate's image is a little stuffy and that's what's happening - but I think a bit much is being read into it in a way that leaves a bit of a nasty taste (portraying her as a jealous woman of a certain age, looking on sourly as a man has fun). I think Starmer-bros need to take a bit of care on this.
Morning all. On reading through the last thread, some thoughts on Thrashergate. I think it was Wulfrun Phil who posted some polling evidence from 2023 locals of GE VI being wider than LE VI. Whilst that is indeed a piece of supporting evidence, some caution needs applying in that the LE question was about an election about to happen (minds made up) and the GE is, as with all opinion polling between terms, about a date far off not yet defined and, as such, it becomes to some extent a measure of dissatisfaction and with more DKs than likely once minds focussed. Differential weighting would also apply given turnout expectations in both type of election which complicates a dual question poll. So, whilst it does suggest support that at a GE the gap might be wider, putting a figure on it you can rely on is too tricky (and admittedly might be more than 7 or 8% as those polls showed as well as less). Reliance on opinion polling cost May dearly - she continued to focus on places she was getting nowhere near whereas Labour were far more canny and reactive to the ground shifting. The 5 million votes just cast give us a good generic overview of where we stand - somewhat worse for the blues than the Thrasher NEV (which is just a projection of votes cast, not a forecast of votes to come) and somewhat better than the current opinion polling average, the art for the party strategists will be defining just where the line is right now. I'd say about a 10 to 12 point lead for Labour if we voted tomorrow. Tactical voting - complicated this time due to boundary changes and imo likely to favour Labour not the LDs as the spectacular opinion poll leads and the seat forecast polls are making Labour look competitive everywhere. Thus we might end up with some (not by any means loads though) seats looking like 1983 - with a big third place vote because the 'tactical' shot was the wrong one
Beneath Thrasher there is the valid bigger picture point that there is little enthusiasm for Labour, and the locals show that people are willing to shop elsewhere when alternatives are available and credible.
But it’s a shame that his analysis seems to have compounded a number of errors. Firstly, assuming no change in Scotland and Wales, when in the former at least all the evidence points to significant change. Secondly, by what they’ve done with the ‘others’ - seven other gains doesn’t seem credibly the result of any UNS model unless it’s a simplistic one that treats voters for the disparate range of other parties as one bloc backing a single candidate, which is obvious nonsense. Otherwise where are these seven other gains in England? Thirdly, by dropping local voters into a national model without any adjustment, when we all know people vote differently in local elections and the LDs in particular pick up local votes thay they never get in a GE.
And the gross error is that, while the national government and national Tory politicians are widely despised, not all voters punish their local councils and councillors accordingly, especially where they’re doing a reasonable job.
The only counter-argument is that Reform didn’t put up many LE candidates but presumably in the Genny Lec will stand everywhere? Thus potentially syphoning off more unhappy Tories. But that could be balanced off by some who are telling pollsters they are Reform voters as a protest but won’t actually carry through.
That's all fair comment and the NEV has been grossly abused no doubt. If Reform are being overstated in polling as seems likely then we are not a million miles away from a low 40s high 20s scenario perhaps. Something in the 10 to 14 point lead range - enough for a pretty comprehensive win through to Blair styley. I still fancy about a 90 seat majority. One other factor - Galloway standing everywhere (he says, he's already got 150 in place though). As we saw with Yakoob in West Midlands, he picked up 60,000 votes and only announced five weeks ago standing on a gaza ticket. They need to start prompting WPB in polling, if he's at 1% or no show then forget it, but if they start hitting 3% then he becomes a complicating factor. Where they stood Thursday they generally did pretty well. Blackburn, Rochdale, Halifax, Oldham, Birmingham etc could be interesting.
London gives a perfect dry run of how Conservatives v Reform would likely pan out in the general election. Reform contested every available seat, against the Conservatives, and they did not make much of an inroad into their vote.
They may have prevented the Conservatives from flipping Ealing/Hillingdon, but that was about it.
The Conservatives will pick up some of the vote that went to independents, in general election conditions, probably enough to get above 30%+, but I agree that Labour are more than 7% ahead, when it comes to the GE/
We now have two types of independents standing in local elections. The usual closet Tories and the new phenomenon of those draped in the Palestinian flag.
I don't see the Conservatives picking up many switchers from the latter.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
They just following the GOP play-back, claim victory early and loudly and if the result is close cry foul play.
Whilst it's deeply ironic to see Anabobazina posting this as they were one of the people most on the "Hall will win train", they are right.
This site was really very bad and seemed to throw any sense or logic out of the window. The site has been very restrained, professional and objective before, so it was quite odd to see.
Cheers but I’m he, not they!
Really gets my goatwhen people think they are being politically correct by improperly using "they" grammatically in case they offend some snowflake.
OT Government spokesman on sky just mentioned earmarking asylum seekers for the Rwanda. Unfortunate use of words. My greyhounds have earmarks. Will they be foot shackled at the airport?
I don't really see why any earmarking is needed - they are disembarking from boats nearly every day. Far better to send the message of the channel journey being a one way round trip to Rwanda.
Erm... About that...
The one (1) person the government paid to voluntarily go to Rwanda seems to have been lost. This bodes well. (Via LouCalvey).
Rwanda clearly will only keep the refugees for as long as it gets paid. It will push them out the moment it gets its money. They did that for Israel and they will do the same for the United Kingdom.
It has nothing to do with what Rwanda will or won't do. The migrants didn't want to be in Rwanda; they wanted to be in the UK. If the opportunities were in Rwanda, they'd be there already. They will be moved to Rwanda, and abscond extremely fast, freeing up space and going back to their home countries, or trying somewhere else, or, if really determined, the UK again. The system needs to be off the boat, on a flight. Then the boats will stop coming, the gangs will die out, a great evil will have been stopped, and a huge public policy problem will have been solved.
It has everything to do with what Rwanda will or will not do. Rwanda forced refugees under the Israeli scheme to leave the country once it had collected the cash.It will presumably do the same under the UK scheme. It is only interested in the money and has no intention of providing asylum. The Rwanda scheme is built on a lie.
Morning all. On reading through the last thread, some thoughts on Thrashergate. I think it was Wulfrun Phil who posted some polling evidence from 2023 locals of GE VI being wider than LE VI. Whilst that is indeed a piece of supporting evidence, some caution needs applying in that the LE question was about an election about to happen (minds made up) and the GE is, as with all opinion polling between terms, about a date far off not yet defined and, as such, it becomes to some extent a measure of dissatisfaction and with more DKs than likely once minds focussed. Differential weighting would also apply given turnout expectations in both type of election which complicates a dual question poll. So, whilst it does suggest support that at a GE the gap might be wider, putting a figure on it you can rely on is too tricky (and admittedly might be more than 7 or 8% as those polls showed as well as less). Reliance on opinion polling cost May dearly - she continued to focus on places she was getting nowhere near whereas Labour were far more canny and reactive to the ground shifting. The 5 million votes just cast give us a good generic overview of where we stand - somewhat worse for the blues than the Thrasher NEV (which is just a projection of votes cast, not a forecast of votes to come) and somewhat better than the current opinion polling average, the art for the party strategists will be defining just where the line is right now. I'd say about a 10 to 12 point lead for Labour if we voted tomorrow. Tactical voting - complicated this time due to boundary changes and imo likely to favour Labour not the LDs as the spectacular opinion poll leads and the seat forecast polls are making Labour look competitive everywhere. Thus we might end up with some (not by any means loads though) seats looking like 1983 - with a big third place vote because the 'tactical' shot was the wrong one
Beneath Thrasher there is the valid bigger picture point that there is little enthusiasm for Labour, and the locals show that people are willing to shop elsewhere when alternatives are available and credible.
But it’s a shame that his analysis seems to have compounded a number of errors. Firstly, assuming no change in Scotland and Wales, when in the former at least all the evidence points to significant change. Secondly, by what they’ve done with the ‘others’ - seven other gains doesn’t seem credibly the result of any UNS model unless it’s a simplistic one that treats voters for the disparate range of other parties as one bloc backing a single candidate, which is obvious nonsense. Otherwise where are these seven other gains in England? Thirdly, by dropping local voters into a national model without any adjustment, when we all know people vote differently in local elections and the LDs in particular pick up local votes thay they never get in a GE.
And the gross error is that, while the national government and national Tory politicians are widely despised, not all voters punish their local councils and councillors accordingly, especially where they’re doing a reasonable job.
The only counter-argument is that Reform didn’t put up many LE candidates but presumably in the Genny Lec will stand everywhere? Thus potentially syphoning off more unhappy Tories. But that could be balanced off by some who are telling pollsters they are Reform voters as a protest but won’t actually carry through.
That's all fair comment and the NEV has been grossly abused no doubt. If Reform are being overstated in polling as seems likely then we are not a million miles away from a low 40s high 20s scenario perhaps. Something in the 10 to 14 point lead range - enough for a pretty comprehensive win through to Blair styley. I still fancy about a 90 seat majority. One other factor - Galloway standing everywhere (he says, he's already got 150 in place though). As we saw with Yakoob in West Midlands, he picked up 60,000 votes and only announced five weeks ago standing on a gaza ticket. They need to start prompting WPB in polling, if he's at 1% or no show then forget it, but if they start hitting 3% then he becomes a complicating factor. Where they stood Thursday they generally did pretty well. Blackburn, Rochdale, Halifax, Oldham, Birmingham etc could be interesting.
London gives a perfect dry run of how Conservatives v Reform would likely pan out in the general election. Reform contested every available seat, against the Conservatives, and they did not make much of an inroad into their vote.
They may have prevented the Conservatives from flipping Ealing/Hillingdon, but that was about it.
The Conservatives will pick up some of the vote that went to independents, in general election conditions, probably enough to get above 30%+, but I agree that Labour are more than 7% ahead, when it comes to the GE/
Labour lost nearly two third of their seats, and won just 7% of the total. If one read straight across from these elections, to the General, they would be heading for one of the worst defeats in the post war period. But, in the end, they performed quite respectably in the general election.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
They just following the GOP play-back, claim victory early and loudly and if the result is close cry foul play.
Whilst it's deeply ironic to see Anabobazina posting this as they were one of the people most on the "Hall will win train", they are right.
This site was really very bad and seemed to throw any sense or logic out of the window. The site has been very restrained, professional and objective before, so it was quite odd to see.
Cheers but I’m he, not they!
Really gets my goatwhen people think they are being politically correct by improperly using "they" grammatically in case they offend some snowflake.
It always surprises me when people use 'snowflake' in the same breath is being offended about other people's use of pronouns.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
They just following the GOP play-back, claim victory early and loudly and if the result is close cry foul play.
Whilst it's deeply ironic to see Anabobazina posting this as they were one of the people most on the "Hall will win train", they are right.
This site was really very bad and seemed to throw any sense or logic out of the window. The site has been very restrained, professional and objective before, so it was quite odd to see.
Cheers but I’m he, not they!
Really gets my goatwhen people think they are being politically correct by improperly using "they" grammatically in case they offend some snowflake.
It isn’t improper to use “they” as a gender neutral pronoun if you don’t know which one to use for God’s sake.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
Sorry, but weren’t you one of them?
No, I said at one stage that my view had been changed by the posts on here - and also said at the time (in the same post) that I was almost certainly being irrational. I was certainly influenced by it. But then, in the past, PB has been a generally good guide on election night. Not this time!
We (well, I) are good at collating data and drawing conclusions, and in POTUS or UKGE elections where there is a constant stream of counted votes we can discuss well. But in the gap between the end of the election and the vote counts being released we only have gossip and tittle-tattle and we (well, I) go haywire on a GIGO basis.
In the specific case of LONMAYORAL24 the only info we had was the gossip from various sources, a possible postal vote leak, and the turnout data, all of which were surprisingly favorable for Hall. Given that the only data available suggested a Hall win, the only conclusion was a Hall win. When actual count data came in, it became rapidly obvious that she had lost and PB corrected accordingly.
Lessons to be learned are as follows * We (well, I) am not good at interpreting low-quality data and should not predict until actual count data is available * We are used as a source by Twitter, which is then fed back to us, and we have a feedback loop. So we (well, I), were both cause of and sufferer of the problem * During the low-quality data period it is possible to manipulate the media and Twitter to swing the odds dramatically in such a way to accrue profit from artificially-created value bets. This offers an interesting possibility for betting engineering. * Journalists know f*** all. Wait for the count data.
Considering POTUS24 is six months away, these are good lessons to know now, yes?
I don’t believe you can possibly argue that the only data available pointed to a Hall win. All the data pointed to a Khan win, as others including myself maintained throughout. What we had on the third were some snippets of anecdata, that subsequently turned out to be nonsense (as I said at the time, postal votes are verified face down so claims from postal verifications are almost always rubbish), and some turnout data that was hardly dramatic, and probably explained - if explanation is needed - by some normally non-voters getting off their arses in Outer London to vote for Reform.
The mystery is how Anabob as one of the very first people to have predicted a Hall win (based on nothing, as far as I can see), almost as soon as polls closed, can now be asking how this ridiculous notion arose?
Partly it's the difference in brain wiring that correlates a bit with which political instincts. An overfocus on what can go wrong makes socialism attractive, an underfocus does the same for libertarian capitalism. See the way that Blair and Starmer have trod the path to Number Ten- incredibly cautiously. You wouldn't get a Tory doing that; at their best, that optimism one of their attractive features.
One of the lessons of the last week is to ignore what party sources say, especially when it's not obvious what their basis is for saying it. The "turnout is up/down in the right places" stuff was clearly made up, but we all swallowed it a bit.
What is worth looking at is what the parties are doing. In London, Hall's campaign was obviously low-energy compared with Johnson's wins. That ought to have been a clue that she wasn't on track to win. Similarly, Labour's move of activists from Teesside to the West Midlands was a pretty good indication of where the front line of the election was.
Not much sunny optimism on ConHome. https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/05/goodbyeee/ … Half our council seats – and twelve authorities – gone. Third place behind the Liberal Democrats. Eleven mayoral races lost out of twelve. Due to the lethargic way in which the results were counted, the true extent of the pain has almost been dulled. The more one considers it, the more it seems the anti-Sunak lot stood down too early. Weren’t these the results they were hoping for?
Yet the fight seems to have gone out of the rebels. Jenkyns, Simon Clarke, and Suella Braverman – all persistent Sunak critics – have called for mythical “policy changes”, but not demand an immediate resignation. The hope amongst some is that Sunak can own the coming loss, allowing the right to swoop in post-election. The flaw in their logic is that it relies on keeping their seats.
But it’s hard to see what, say, installing Penny Mordaunt as a boat-stopping, strike-breaking, ocean-going vehicle of electoral salvation might achieve. It would rely on HMS Sword-Carrier not only being able to appease both the party’s left and right, but mimic Johnson in 2019, except without Vote Leave, the benefit of the doubt, or the overwhelming need to Get Brexit Done.
There’s nothing to stop the Prime Minister’s critics from buying ad space in the Telegraph to print “WE TOLD YOU SO” in big friendly letters. But one doesn’t sense the appetite for crowing. As with Blackadder accepting his appalling fate, there is a widespread air of resignation. Our survey and suggests the general assumption is that Sunak going would only make things worse. Our time is up.
The big push can only be avoided for so long. In a year, the Prime Minister has brought the party precisely nowhere. Even those once optimistic that he could be Johnson but competent have lost the appetite. Reboots have rung hollow. We are 20 points behind and commanding under a fifth of the vote. Rwanda is a dud, Farage will return, and the voters are miserable. Why cling on?
There will be no cunning plans. Notwithstanding the ability of Tory MPs to shoot themselves in the foot, it seems that Sunak has done terribly enough to have earnt the right to lead us slowly towards the guns later this year at the head of his denuded infantry. Our former Editor once wrote of our party in a Totentanz – a dance of death. This will be a slow, painful, and hopeless march...
For some unaccountable reason this reminds me of my current reading: the Franklin expedition. Marching hundreds of miles south from where their ships Terror and Erebus were stuck in the ice. Shedding corpses and skeletons, and latterly eating each other, all over the Arctic, and the last few dying in and around a ship's boat dragged all the way.
The surprise of the decade would be if the Tories turn this into Shackleton's expedition instead of Franklin's.
For that they would need a Shackleton, and it doesn't look like they have one (either in charge now or waiting in the wings...)
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
I think you get jitters in that it's third time around, Labour often loses etc. but the polls point to one direction and they are rarely wrong. So although I had "internal" jitters, I did not feel that the actual data we had contradicted them. It is slightly baffling to me that intelligent people on PB did when they haven't before.
Brcause they want the Tories to win
I think that’s certainly true of some of them: they were wishcasting in great detail about why Khan had lost, for long periods of the evening. It makes embarrassing reading.
This is not my recollection at all. The typically cool level-headed unexcitable right wingers - ie me - were quite confident that Khan was gonna win. It was flighty effete nervy left wingers - ie you - that were convinced Hall was going to steal it
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
OT Government spokesman on sky just mentioned earmarking asylum seekers for the Rwanda. Unfortunate use of words. My greyhounds have earmarks. Will they be foot shackled at the airport?
I don't really see why any earmarking is needed - they are disembarking from boats nearly every day. Far better to send the message of the channel journey being a one way round trip to Rwanda.
Erm... About that...
The one (1) person the government paid to voluntarily go to Rwanda seems to have been lost. This bodes well. (Via LouCalvey).
Rwanda clearly will only keep the refugees for as long as it gets paid. It will push them out the moment it gets its money. They did that for Israel and they will do the same for the United Kingdom.
It has nothing to do with what Rwanda will or won't do. The migrants didn't want to be in Rwanda; they wanted to be in the UK. If the opportunities were in Rwanda, they'd be there already. They will be moved to Rwanda, and abscond extremely fast, freeing up space and going back to their home countries, or trying somewhere else, or, if really determined, the UK again. The system needs to be off the boat, on a flight. Then the boats will stop coming, the gangs will die out, a great evil will have been stopped, and a huge public policy problem will have been solved.
It has everything to do with what Rwanda will or will not do. Rwanda forced refugees under the Israeli scheme to leave the country once it had collected the cash.It will presumably do the same under the UK scheme. It is only interested in the money and has no intention of providing asylum. The Rwanda scheme is built on a lie.
It won't need to force them. The only lie is that the vast majority of these people are legitimately seeking asylum. They are economic migrants. Nothing wrong with that, good for them for wanting to better themselves, but we are absolutely not obliged morally to let them into the country or pay for their upkeep. It would be better and safer for everyone concerned if they stopped trying to come.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
They just following the GOP play-back, claim victory early and loudly and if the result is close cry foul play.
Whilst it's deeply ironic to see Anabobazina posting this as they were one of the people most on the "Hall will win train", they are right.
This site was really very bad and seemed to throw any sense or logic out of the window. The site has been very restrained, professional and objective before, so it was quite odd to see.
Cheers but I’m he, not they!
Really gets my goatwhen people think they are being politically correct by improperly using "they" grammatically in case they offend some snowflake.
It isn’t improper to use “they” as a gender neutral pronoun if you don’t know which one to use for God’s sake.
She sounds like she’s talking about an ex-husband she bitterly despises after hearing that he’s back on the local dating scene.
Laura K is descending even lower. How did she ever get this job?
I'm not a fan of hers at all, but think this one is a bit unfair.
In that clip, she's describing what the Labour PR strategy is in terms of softening the technocratic, elitist image Starmer has by sticking him in mid-priced casuals and sending him out to normal, unglamorous places.
It's not particularly groundbreaking journalism - yes, that's quite a common strategy when your candidate's image is a little stuffy and that's what's happening - but I think a bit much is being read into it in a way that leaves a bit of a nasty taste (portraying her as a jealous woman of a certain age, looking on sourly as a man has fun). I think Starmer-bros need to take a bit of care on this.
She literally said the Khan election was going to be very close on nothing but an "anonymous" source.
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
Sorry, but weren’t you one of them?
No, I said at one stage that my view had been changed by the posts on here - and also said at the time (in the same post) that I was almost certainly being irrational. I was certainly influenced by it. But then, in the past, PB has been a generally good guide on election night. Not this time!
We (well, I) are good at collating data and drawing conclusions, and in POTUS or UKGE elections where there is a constant stream of counted votes we can discuss well. But in the gap between the end of the election and the vote counts being released we only have gossip and tittle-tattle and we (well, I) go haywire on a GIGO basis.
In the specific case of LONMAYORAL24 the only info we had was the gossip from various sources, a possible postal vote leak, and the turnout data, all of which were surprisingly favorable for Hall. Given that the only data available suggested a Hall win, the only conclusion was a Hall win. When actual count data came in, it became rapidly obvious that she had lost and PB corrected accordingly.
Lessons to be learned are as follows * We (well, I) am not good at interpreting low-quality data and should not predict until actual count data is available * We are used as a source by Twitter, which is then fed back to us, and we have a feedback loop. So we (well, I), were both cause of and sufferer of the problem * During the low-quality data period it is possible to manipulate the media and Twitter to swing the odds dramatically in such a way to accrue profit from artificially-created value bets. This offers an interesting possibility for betting engineering. * Journalists know f*** all. Wait for the count data.
Considering POTUS24 is six months away, these are good lessons to know now, yes?
I don’t believe you can possibly argue that the only data available pointed to a Hall win. All the data pointed to a Khan win, as others including myself maintained throughout. What we had on the third were some snippets of anecdata, that subsequently turned out to be nonsense (as I said at the time, postal votes are verified face down so claims from postal verifications are almost always rubbish), and some turnout data that was hardly dramatic, and probably explained - if explanation is needed - by some normally non-voters getting off their arses in Outer London to vote for Reform.
The mystery is how Anabob as one of the very first people to have predicted a Hall win (based on nothing, as far as I can see), almost as soon as polls closed, can now be asking how this ridiculous notion arose?
Partly it's the difference in brain wiring that correlates a bit with which political instincts. An overfocus on what can go wrong makes socialism attractive, an underfocus does the same for libertarian capitalism. See the way that Blair and Starmer have trod the path to Number Ten- incredibly cautiously. You wouldn't get a Tory doing that; at their best, that optimism one of their attractive features.
One of the lessons of the last week is to ignore what party sources say, especially when it's not obvious what their basis is for saying it. The "turnout is up/down in the right places" stuff was clearly made up, but we all swallowed it a bit.
What is worth looking at is what the parties are doing. In London, Hall's campaign was obviously low-energy compared with Johnson's wins. That ought to have been a clue that she wasn't on track to win. Similarly, Labour's move of activists from Teesside to the West Midlands was a pretty good indication of where the front line of the election was.
Not much sunny optimism on ConHome. https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/05/goodbyeee/ … Half our council seats – and twelve authorities – gone. Third place behind the Liberal Democrats. Eleven mayoral races lost out of twelve. Due to the lethargic way in which the results were counted, the true extent of the pain has almost been dulled. The more one considers it, the more it seems the anti-Sunak lot stood down too early. Weren’t these the results they were hoping for?
Yet the fight seems to have gone out of the rebels. Jenkyns, Simon Clarke, and Suella Braverman – all persistent Sunak critics – have called for mythical “policy changes”, but not demand an immediate resignation. The hope amongst some is that Sunak can own the coming loss, allowing the right to swoop in post-election. The flaw in their logic is that it relies on keeping their seats.
But it’s hard to see what, say, installing Penny Mordaunt as a boat-stopping, strike-breaking, ocean-going vehicle of electoral salvation might achieve. It would rely on HMS Sword-Carrier not only being able to appease both the party’s left and right, but mimic Johnson in 2019, except without Vote Leave, the benefit of the doubt, or the overwhelming need to Get Brexit Done.
There’s nothing to stop the Prime Minister’s critics from buying ad space in the Telegraph to print “WE TOLD YOU SO” in big friendly letters. But one doesn’t sense the appetite for crowing. As with Blackadder accepting his appalling fate, there is a widespread air of resignation. Our survey and suggests the general assumption is that Sunak going would only make things worse. Our time is up.
The big push can only be avoided for so long. In a year, the Prime Minister has brought the party precisely nowhere. Even those once optimistic that he could be Johnson but competent have lost the appetite. Reboots have rung hollow. We are 20 points behind and commanding under a fifth of the vote. Rwanda is a dud, Farage will return, and the voters are miserable. Why cling on?
There will be no cunning plans. Notwithstanding the ability of Tory MPs to shoot themselves in the foot, it seems that Sunak has done terribly enough to have earnt the right to lead us slowly towards the guns later this year at the head of his denuded infantry. Our former Editor once wrote of our party in a Totentanz – a dance of death. This will be a slow, painful, and hopeless march...
For some unaccountable reason this reminds me of my current reading: the Franklin expedition. Marching hundreds of miles south from where their ships Terror and Erebus were stuck in the ice. Shedding corpses and skeletons, and latterly eating each other, all over the Arctic, and the last few dying in and around a ship's boat dragged all the way.
The surprise of the decade would be if the Tories turn this into Shackleton's expedition instead of Franklin's.
For that they would need a Shackleton, and it doesn't look like they have one (either in charge now or waiting in the wings...)
Bit late for that now, not least because quite a few have been left behind, or latterly formed the rations, as the locals look on in bemusement (not knowing that they'll be blamed).
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
I think you get jitters in that it's third time around, Labour often loses etc. but the polls point to one direction and they are rarely wrong. So although I had "internal" jitters, I did not feel that the actual data we had contradicted them. It is slightly baffling to me that intelligent people on PB did when they haven't before.
Brcause they want the Tories to win
I think that’s certainly true of some of them: they were wishcasting in great detail about why Khan had lost, for long periods of the evening. It makes embarrassing reading.
This is not my recollection at all. The typically cool level-headed unexcitable right wingers - ie me - were quite confident that Khan was gonna win. It was flighty effete nervy left wingers - ie you - that were convinced Hall was going to steal it
Piece of data pertinent to 'effect on the next election' watchers, Local election data
Reform UK got about 89,000 votes across 300 wards - approx avg 297 votes per candidate
Workers Party got just over 20,000 votes over 35 wards - approx avg 571 votes per candidate
Counter that with Pccs
Reform got ca 66,000 votes over 2 areas (Derbys and Lincs) (33k each) - at about 14.5%
Workers got 8,400 in Bedfordshire at 8.3%
Apert from being based on just 2PCCs, isn't the reason Reform did much better in PCC voting is that the are usually suburban or rural areas?
I'd guess yeah it's because what attraction Reform has is fairly universally spread, at least will be visible in any type of location, Workers Party seems to have concentrated pockets of urban support - the more suburban and rural wards they stood in were much weaker, but the very urban ones were very strong comparatively
In some areas of Britain we are now witnessing the rise of a darker, tribal, more sectarian politics which, ironically, is emerging under the banner of the so-called ‘liberal progressive’ Greens"
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
Those loos will be single occupancy so not shared public space.
Another pointless, petty, meaningless regulation. Allow premises to offer what they want and let the consumer decide. If I need a dump I don’t really care if the toilet is gender neutral or male.
Are tiny cafes, which usually have only one loo, now required to have two before they can open?
The change to building regulations will also allow contained, universal toilets in addition to single-sex toilets where space allows, or instead of single-sex toilets where there is not enough space.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
In some areas of Britain we are now witnessing the rise of a darker, tribal, more sectarian politics which, ironically, is emerging under the banner of the so-called ‘liberal progressive’ Greens"
In some areas of Britain we are now witnessing the rise of a darker, tribal, more sectarian politics which, ironically, is emerging under the banner of the so-called ‘liberal progressive’ Greens"
Redditch has a 16K tory majority. It's council went Labour massively on Thursday.
Middle England.
It is not even on the target list of seats as far as I can see.
a) Different turnout b) Local elections sometimes have opposite results to general elections.
But Hung Parliament is stretching it, yes.
It’s been a bizarre few days for political ‘analysis’, I have commented on the frankly weird and disturbing incessant ramping of Hall on here masquerading as betting insight. But even that was based on initial rumours that Hall could win. She got utterly hammered. I have been away all weekend. Did we ever ascertain from where the initial notion arose?
They just following the GOP play-back, claim victory early and loudly and if the result is close cry foul play.
Whilst it's deeply ironic to see Anabobazina posting this as they were one of the people most on the "Hall will win train", they are right.
This site was really very bad and seemed to throw any sense or logic out of the window. The site has been very restrained, professional and objective before, so it was quite odd to see.
Cheers but I’m he, not they!
Really gets my goatwhen people think they are being politically correct by improperly using "they" grammatically in case they offend some snowflake.
It isn’t improper to use “they” as a gender neutral pronoun if you don’t know which one to use for God’s sake.
Comments
As I see it there are two important changes:
1 - A general reduction in speeds. In Wales monitoring so far demonstrates that the average speed has reduced from 29mph to 25mph, and that 97% of drivers in 20mph zones on main roads are now driving at under 26mph.
That is a huge positive.
2 - Following on, there has been a significant reduction in the more extreme speeders. Those who were previously driving at 35-40 through residential areas will now be doing more like 26-30, which again is a big difference.
There will be some tweaks, but people living and driving places find that they like safer streets / roads where they aren't kept away by risk of intimidation or injury. When reduced KSI data comes out, it will be very persuasive.
You may not have been the source, but you were early on the bandwagon. You should be explaining to us how people came to believe such nonsense, not the other way around!
Aaron Bastani said almost exactly the same thing on those days.
What's Aaron Bastani doing these days? Oh yes, amplifying a man who thinks gay people are "unnatural".
There are a couple of exceptions in seats where ex-ChangeUK people ran for the Lib Dems, and I'm not including Scotland where they may well beat the SNP from third over the Tories or from the Tories over the SNP.
Professional Conduct is a massive part of it.
My sympathies with those environmentalists who have stuck with the party but look at it with despair.
There is a vast raft of philosophical and moral (and legal) arguments as to why lawyers (complete with morals and a conscience) should defend a client to the best of their ability. There is an also a vast raft of philosophical, moral and legal ruling on where the limits are.
The Post Office lawyers broke the law in a number of ways. They hid evidence, and lied about hiding evidence, from the courts.
I'm sick of being told that any vote not for one of the two largest parties is a "wasted" vote, but the argument, undemocratic as it is, has an undeniable force.
There are quite a lot of sensible Green councillors looking to improve environmental policies in their local area and support a party with such policies on a national level - you can disagree on specifics, but it's all perfectly sane stuff within the bounds of normal politics. They've done well and the Green base in local government is now really quite impressive.
Then there are incredibly dubious entryists, and increasing numbers of those, that the Green Party nationally has done little to address as they see growth of the base as everything and don't look too hard at what that base contains. But it will really bite them hard - it will feed through to voters, and the councillors themselves will ask if they want to be associated with it, or would prefer to throw their hand in with another party or just walk away.
The Greens need to kick them all out, or split.
A universal toilet is defined by the government as a self-contained room with a toilet and sink for individual use.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv2xly8vxreo
Not that much Parliamentary time left though, even if the election is December.
These nationalists are either getting above themselves or ambitious*
(* or are the Tories using generic literature I wonder
She sounds like she’s talking about an ex-husband she bitterly despises after hearing that he’s back on the local dating scene.
Laura K is descending even lower. How did she ever get this job?
Cheers but I’m he, not they! Yes. I got it wrong and allowed my jitters to overcome me. But there were entire essays on here explaining why Khan had lost, luxuriating in the detail. Reading it all back now is deeply embarrassing.
Warning ⚠️ Mike Graham will block you if you tag him
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
https://twitter.com/savanQadir/status/1787401209818513852
One of the other people ramping the Hall "win" was Mike Graham.
On the doorsteps, I think the answer to that is pretty clear, it's a resounding "get the bastards out", and it's where the Thrasher projection goes badly awry. But, in fairness to him, he could say that he's just working on the voting data rather than my canvas data or unverified assertion as to what I reckon voters are saying.
reliable voter not only forgot to vote but didn’t think it a sufficient risk to necessitate scurrying to the polling station just before it closed. It was a silly thing to base my jitters on but I did at least say clearly on here I was being irrational!
- If you only have space for a single universal toilet (self contained room) that's fine.
- If you have more space, you need to provide single sex facilities.
Sustrans really are heroes. Back in 2018 they did a survey under their "Paths for Everyone" project and found that their 13000 miles of cycling/walking network had 16,000 inaccessible barriers on it. They only own about 1% of it so it is difficult.
They did a Thrain of Erebor sort of "this cannot be borne" moment (see the dwarf/goblin wars), and are now removing or redesigning them at a rate of around 400 per year, and have pruned the network back to give a higher general quality.
But it's a struggle, with Councils whacking barriers on unlawfully without thought.
I like the design, and she may join my favourite cycling author's list alongside Carlton Reid - who is a social historian / journo who did "Roads were not Built for Cars" and 'Britain's Lost Cycletracks' *.
* https://www.britishcycletracks.com/
https://authory.com/CarltonReid/EPISODE-352-Laura-Laker-affc97d66cc55495d85d4a559221ed51f
Reform UK got about 89,000 votes across 300 wards - approx avg 297 votes per candidate
Workers Party got just over 20,000 votes over 35 wards - approx avg 571 votes per candidate
Counter that with Pccs
Reform got ca 66,000 votes over 2 areas (Derbys and Lincs) (33k each) - at about 14.5%
Workers got 8,400 in Bedfordshire at 8.3%
They may have prevented the Conservatives from flipping Ealing/Hillingdon, but that was about it.
The Conservatives will pick up some of the vote that went to independents, in general election conditions, probably enough to get above 30%+, but I agree that Labour are more than 7% ahead, when it comes to the GE/
Labour has selected Elizabeth Carr-Ellis, a councillor in Canterbury, to fight the election on its behalf in Angus and Perthshire Glens.
Very pleasant weather up here in Brabin-land.
In that clip, she's describing what the Labour PR strategy is in terms of softening the technocratic, elitist image Starmer has by sticking him in mid-priced casuals and sending him out to normal, unglamorous places.
It's not particularly groundbreaking journalism - yes, that's quite a common strategy when your candidate's image is a little stuffy and that's what's happening - but I think a bit much is being read into it in a way that leaves a bit of a nasty taste (portraying her as a jealous woman of a certain age, looking on sourly as a man has fun). I think Starmer-bros need to take a bit of care on this.
I don't see the Conservatives picking up many switchers from the latter.
I wouldn’t be surprised if northern England and Scotland have had more sunshine hours than london so far, this spring
The first woman to direct a UK election night show, Diana Edwards-Jones, died a few weeks ago at the age of 91.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/apr/18/diana-edwards-jones-obituary
She features in this January 1983 mini-documentary about making News At Ten.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX1ROEGCYd0
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-61882542
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_Kingdom_local_elections
Labour lost nearly two third of their seats, and won just 7% of the total. If one read straight across from these elections, to the General, they would be heading for one of the worst defeats in the post war period. But, in the end, they performed quite respectably in the general election.
Too late for everyone thats turned their backs on you over this Monsieur Lammy
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/05/north-yorkshires-dropped-apostrophe-for-street-signs-upsets-residents
Her credibility is pants.
The more they bang on about Woke and Trans the more votes the Tories lose.
She's got such an annoying voice, I instantly turn off as soon as she comes on.
I didn't know what the person's gender was, what should I have called them?
Goodwin has real Chutzpah.
A couple of decent pubs.
Some good South Asian restaurants.
Otherwise, not so great.