Let’s talk about cats and one cat in particular – politicalbetting.com

System

Let’s talk about cats and one cat in particular – politicalbetting.com

Interestingly I don’t think this is the case now. Modelling here at @focaldataHQ suggests more modest Labour lead of 5-7% is enough for a majority. Now apparently called the “Election cat” @Psythor https://t.co/P0BrjreStY pic.twitter.com/uSrXd7IlMx

Read the full story here

algarkirk

First?

Monksfield

Second

Larry the Cat, the only political cat worth discussing. Soon to have a new master, his sixth? Or was he employed by Brown?

bondegezou

Monksfield said:

First, like Larry the Cat, the only political cat worth discussing !

In domestic policies, maybe, but let’s not overlook Xiǎngxiǎng in Taiwan.

Alanbrooke

Monksfield said:

First, like Larry the Cat, the only political cat worth discussing !

George Galloway does a good portrayal of a cat

Taz

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

Eabhal

Taz said:

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

It will be gone by the end of Monday.

megasaur

The disparity around 2001 is a strong indictment of fptp

Morris_Dancer

Making a backup character for Pathfinder 2e. Going for a ranger (archer, as the party of 5 already has 3 frontline types). I am indeed contemplating the cat as one of the animal companions, alongside bear, scorpion, and bird.

maxh

Reposting FPT

Casino_Royale said:

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Thread on the national service plan and the compulsory volunteering element.

I still don’t like it, but it is nowhere near as bad as some have made out.

https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794474262872445280?s=61

Indeed. Most would simply spend 5 weeks doing that in the summer holidays after their A-levels.

Not a big deal.

They’d rather be in Ibiza

There were nearly 4 months between me finishing A-levels and starting university.

Few can afford spending that long in Ibiza.

There are some that cannot afford not working for 5 weeks.

And yet five weeks earlier they could whilst in full-time compulsory education?

I'd expect this to be funded, even though the details aren't there yet.

Your last sentence, in a nutshell, is why this won't work in the way you hope it will.

Labour are being painfully, painfully careful to pepper every interaction with voters with caution over what we can afford.

Because the economy will dominate everything this election.

The Tories throw an utterly uncosted policy into the mix and gift Labour another few points on relative economic competence, nay relative competence at all.

What will stick after this idea sinks from the headlines is that there is only one serious party of government on offer. The other has morphed into a protest movement to bring back the past.

Benpointer

I assumed this was about yesterday's dead cat.

Alanbrooke

Taz said:

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

he'd have been safer attacking Starmers votes for 7 year olds plan. Now he's on the front line taking the heat not SKS,

Heathener

I said I wouldn’t respond to anything you post @Casino_Royale over this campaign but I will just point out that I’m not campaigning for Labour or any other party. Thank you for your honesty in admitting that you are actively campaigning for the Conservatives.

Yes I will vote Labour this time but I don’t think they’re anywhere near perfect. Just less imperfect than the current lot.

Your last post on the previous thread wasn’t necessary. I don’t ‘take a dump on here every morning.’ Nor do I 'elicit derision’ from everyone, except yourself. But I do think you’re losing it today, if I may so. It’s not your best morning. Not because you may be wrong, but because of the way you’re reacting to everyone else.

I think it’s really good to be able to keep some impartiality, especially when betting and when influencing others to bet. None of us achieve that, of course, but it’s good to be able to take a step back from time to time. You may be right that simply commanding the agenda today has been good for the Conservative cause. I personally doubt that and I think they’re going to lose more support from this, but we will see as the opinion polls roll out.

Thank you to @maxh for picking up on that Callaghan quote from yesterday. As you say, Callaghan’s point was that when the country is in a once in a generation sea-change, nothing you say or do will make a difference.

Scott_xP

@PaulBrandITV

Home Secretary just told Sky News that nobody will end up in prison for failing to do national service.


Subtext - The rich can buy their kids' way out of this batshit scheme

wooliedyed

Rishi channeling his inner Attlee with National Service. Isnt he?
Im ambivalent on it as a policy being over 50 and with no kids. The reaction seems a tad pearl clutchy in some quarters but it also feels rather 'rubbish magic trick reveal' - pulling a rat out of a hat

Benpointer

Morris_Dancer said:

Making a backup character for Pathfinder 2e. Going for a ranger (archer, as the party of 5 already has 3 frontline types). I am indeed contemplating the cat as one of the animal companions, alongside bear, scorpion, and bird.

Niche post Morris. (Or am I the only one on PB that has absolutely zero interest in fantasy role-playing games?)

Heathener

Good thread @TSE

I think you’re right about this.

Two people who have not had a good month:

Rishi Sunak
and
Laura Kuenssberg

Stuartinromford

In other words, it's really important to keep your opponents divided, rather than having them all train their fire on you. The hegemonies of Thatcher and Blair were driven by the other lot being beyond the pale.

A lesson that the Corbynites never learned, and Team Rishi seems to have missed that lesson as well.

Maybe he was too busy doing National Service.

gonatas

Taz said:

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

I am disappointed. I was hoping that the scheme would develop into one where teenagers are conscripted to look after pensioners. That should, surely, shore up the oap vote?

RochdalePioneers

Incidentally, I read that "lets ban computers" is part of Sunak's Bold Action strategy.

Apparently, The Plan includes dropping in things from very left field with zero notice. That just happen to dogwhistle the remaining 12 people who will vote Tory.

Lets consider what other Bold Action policies we can look forward to over the next few weeks:

Chain-gangs for the so-called disabled
The Birch in our schools and a ban on sex education
Solve the prison crisis by walling off places like Middlesbrough and turning them into a gulag.
A flat tax
Raise the voting threshold to Additional Rate taxpayers only

Cicero

The National Service Policy is falling apart after encountering the lightest feather touch of reality. This seems to be another "Dementia tax" style fiasco and entirely an unforced error. Unless the Tories can start offering policies that don´t, actually, alienate even their own side, then it won´t be a cat, it will be a total blow out.

A terrrrible week for the Tories, and it just feels like its going to get so much worse.

Scott_xP

Not a clue...

@BethRigby
Sunak team clear to me this am no-one going to jail over this: “This about giving young people from all backgrounds skills & experience - not a criminal record”

Frame it as ‘opportunities for young people’ but making it mandatory gives it punitive feel for those who might not want to/feel able to do it

Equally what about 18-year-olds who have to work at weekends to pay for eduction, support their families? Told “Royal Commission will be tasked at considering all of this to ensure its open to all”

@LiamThorpECHO
Rishi Sunak had a terrible start to his campaign, took an unscheduled day off to work with his team and came up with the single worst policy of modern times. Fair play.

Luckyguy1983

wooliedyed said:

Rishi channeling his inner Attlee with National Service. Isnt he?
Im ambivalent on it as a policy being over 50 and with no kids. The reaction seems a tad pearl clutchy in some quarters but it also feels rather 'rubbish magic trick reveal' - pulling a rat out of a hat

I think it's a fairly crap stab at getting Refuk voters back on board. It feels like a Cameronite-era policy gussied up as a genuinely right wing policy. It also feels like they've given up on winning - nobody expects to have to implement this.

Benpointer

Sir Michael Take CBE
@MichaelTakeMP

I’ve had a sneak look at our Tory Manifesto!
Along with National Service we’re also bringing back:
Hanging
Fox hunting
Black & White TV
Rationing
Grammar Schools
The cane
Typewriters
Lice
Rickets
Virginity
World War...

https://x.com/MichaelTakeMP/status/1794620067579314337

Foxy

megasaur said:

The disparity around 2001 is a strong indictment of fptp

The fact that it used to be a bias in favour of Labour in the Blair years suggests to me that there isn't really a bias against either party, but rather a bias against parties relying on their core vote only.

So appealing to the political centre ground not only appeals to floating voters but also flips the bias in the FPTP system in your own parties favour.

It wouldn't surprise me at all to see a bias in favour of Labour showing on that Cat graph on July 5th.

Scott_xP

@Samfr

I know it's stupid electioneering and will never happen, but this has really would me up.

How dare this bunch of clowns who've spent the last few years destroying everything turn around and insist that kids are the ones not displaying adequate civic responsibility?

maxh

Casino_Royale said:

maxh said:

Casino_Royale said:

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Thread on the national service plan and the compulsory volunteering element.

I still don’t like it, but it is nowhere near as bad as some have made out.

https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794474262872445280?s=61

Indeed. Most would simply spend 5 weeks doing that in the summer holidays after their A-levels.

Not a big deal.

They’d rather be in Ibiza

There were nearly 4 months between me finishing A-levels and starting university.

Few can afford spending that long in Ibiza.

There are some that cannot afford not working for 5 weeks.

And yet five weeks earlier they could whilst in full-time compulsory education?

I'd expect this to be funded, even though the details aren't there yet.

Your last sentence, in a nutshell, is why this won't work in the way you hope it will.

Labour are being painfully, painfully careful to pepper every interaction with voters with caution over what we can afford.

Because the economy will dominate everything this election.

The Tories throw an utterly uncosted policy into the mix and gift Labour another few points on relative economic competence, nay relative competence at all.

What will stick after this idea sinks from the headlines is that there is only one serious party of government on offer. The other has morphed into a protest movement to bring back the past.

The Tories don't need to cost in the same way Labour do.

Just like the Tories don't need to prove they care about national security.

FPT

I did think about that, but I'm not sure that's still true after furlough and particularly Truss.

Dura_Ace

Benpointer said:

Fox hunting

I'll be amazed if we get to polling day without this being wheeled out.

Casino_Royale

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

DM_Andy

Morris_Dancer said:

Making a backup character for Pathfinder 2e. Going for a ranger (archer, as the party of 5 already has 3 frontline types). I am indeed contemplating the cat as one of the animal companions, alongside bear, scorpion, and bird.

Have you got Howl of the Wild yet? Get your ranger a giraffe mount, move 35ft, can Shove foes back 10ft and got a decent double move and stomp attack.

Heathener

It’s pretty noticeable that a significant number of posters on here who lean right of centre are attacking this idea, sometimes scathingly.

It does make you wonder who they thought this would actually appeal to? It must be a very small core.

Casino_Royale

maxh said:

Reposting FPT

Casino_Royale said:

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Thread on the national service plan and the compulsory volunteering element.

I still don’t like it, but it is nowhere near as bad as some have made out.

https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794474262872445280?s=61

Indeed. Most would simply spend 5 weeks doing that in the summer holidays after their A-levels.

Not a big deal.

They’d rather be in Ibiza

There were nearly 4 months between me finishing A-levels and starting university.

Few can afford spending that long in Ibiza.

There are some that cannot afford not working for 5 weeks.

And yet five weeks earlier they could whilst in full-time compulsory education?

I'd expect this to be funded, even though the details aren't there yet.

Your last sentence, in a nutshell, is why this won't work in the way you hope it will.

Labour are being painfully, painfully careful to pepper every interaction with voters with caution over what we can afford.

Because the economy will dominate everything this election.

The Tories throw an utterly uncosted policy into the mix and gift Labour another few points on relative economic competence, nay relative competence at all.

What will stick after this idea sinks from the headlines is that there is only one serious party of government on offer. The other has morphed into a protest movement to bring back the past.

Tories don't need to prove their credentials on public spending in the same way Labour do.

SandraMc

I had a lie-in this morning and just got up to read this new policy. Thought I was still dreaming at first. One of the alternatives to National Service is to help the NHS by delivering prescriptions. Let's get teenagers to deliver drugs. What could possibly go wrong?

RochdalePioneers

LibDem email just received:

Ian,

I never thought I’d be writing this.

I agree with Rishi Sunak: we need millions of people to do national service.

We need millions of people to commit to serving their country in its time of need - by voting this Government out of office.

I need you, Ian, to be part of our national service.

This is your moment. This is your time to sign up and to commit to a better future for our country.

Casino_Royale

Taz said:

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

Eabhal

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

4D chess?

Foxy

Cicero said:

The National Service Policy is falling apart after encountering the lightest feather touch of reality. This seems to be another "Dementia tax" style fiasco and entirely an unforced error. Unless the Tories can start offering policies that don´t, actually, alienate even their own side, then it won´t be a cat, it will be a total blow out.

A terrrrible week for the Tories, and it just feels like its going to get so much worse.

No, the Dementia Tax was actually a good policy to solve a real problem, just appallingly badly presented.

As a result we have no real plan for Social Care, and being unable to discharge patients puts a major strain on a failing NHS.

While "Bring Back National Service" is a cockamaimy solution looking for a problem.

Carnyx

RochdalePioneers said:

Incidentally, I read that "lets ban computers" is part of Sunak's Bold Action strategy.

Apparently, The Plan includes dropping in things from very left field with zero notice. That just happen to dogwhistle the remaining 12 people who will vote Tory.

Lets consider what other Bold Action policies we can look forward to over the next few weeks:

Chain-gangs for the so-called disabled
The Birch in our schools and a ban on sex education
Solve the prison crisis by walling off places like Middlesbrough and turning them into a gulag.
A flat tax
Raise the voting threshold to Additional Rate taxpayers only

I log on and wtf!? I have to go straight to the Graun to find out.

One thing *anyone* knows from the history of National Service - there almost certainly aren't enough service people to actually do the training of a significant fraction of the young population as well as their other jobs. Incredibly inefficient in terms of producing squaddie-hours on the ground, too, and as for matelots and Raff types, forget it - they need too much training now (even in the 1950s with simpler tech it was getting pretty obvious).

Casino_Royale

Heathener said:

Good thread @TSE

I think you’re right about this.

Two people who have not had a good month:

Rishi Sunak
and
Laura Kuenssberg

I don't get at all the hate for Laura Kuenssberg.

She wouldn't be getting half of it if she were a bloke.

Sunil_Prasannan

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

KEEP CALMER

and

VOTE STARMER

Scott_xP

Casino_Royale said:

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Security and Defence is not what Tories want to be talking about.

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

RochdalePioneers

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Again, gently, how does this work that even Tory supporters have moved on from "hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed"

You rightly point to our lack of skills in the workforce. Our threadbare armed forces. The need to focus on defence after so many years of not doing.

Sunak has a plan? 14 years in office and you have shagged the military and left the workforce unskilled and untrained. Is that the plan? Or is this where you insist that its Beer Korma's fault?

Casino_Royale

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

4D chess?

See my post upthread.

Benpointer

Blimey, the comments on ConHome on the NatServ plan are unrelentingly negative.

https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/26/this-campaign-must-be-the-nadir-of-government-by-bunker/

I don't often dip into ConHome - are the commenters all lefty infiltrators?

TimS

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Genius. Except who hollowed out the armed forces over the last 14 years?

Carnyx

Stuartinromford said:

In other words, it's really important to keep your opponents divided, rather than having them all train their fire on you. The hegemonies of Thatcher and Blair were driven by the other lot being beyond the pale.

A lesson that the Corbynites never learned, and Team Rishi seems to have missed that lesson as well.

Maybe he was too busy doing National Service.

CCF at his Public School, more likely. (No idea if other schools even have it now.)

Heathener

@TSE and others with betting in mind, is there any way of us drilling down into tactical voting?

It’s mentioned a lot. We know it goes on. It’s allegedly on the increase. But this is all so vague when you’re trying to make bets.

Is there any way of us quantifying this? How many people in the key affected constituencies a) are really properly informed about it and b) prepared and motivated enough to vote tactically accordingly?

Any chance of an in-depth thread on tactical voting please pretty please?

Casino_Royale

TimS said:

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Genius. Except who hollowed out the armed forces over the last 14 years?

So, Starmer could maybe spike it by pledging to raise UK defence spending to 2.5% - or more - of GDP.

Will he?

Casino_Royale

Benpointer said:

Blimey, the comments on ConHome on the NatServ plan are unrelentingly negative.

https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/26/this-campaign-must-be-the-nadir-of-government-by-bunker/

I don't often dip into ConHome - are the commenters all lefty infiltrators?

It's Reform voters worried it's going to undercut Reform.

Same for much of the Mail and Telegraph comments.

DM_Andy

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

So have I got this right? An article on ConservativeHome by the Deputy Editor is "an anonymous Internet user" and hence his opinions can be ignored but the comments on your WhatsApp groups can be considered as the authentic voice of the British people?

Casino_Royale

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Security and Defence is not what Tories want to be talking about.

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

And, without Labour pledging to refund an expansion, that's just piss and wind.

Scott_xP

Casino_Royale said:

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

ROFLMAO

Scott_xP

@CJTerry
There's going to be a swerve into a new law to make Snickers be called Marathon bars again in week 2

Foxy

maxh said:

Reposting FPT

Casino_Royale said:

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Thread on the national service plan and the compulsory volunteering element.

I still don’t like it, but it is nowhere near as bad as some have made out.

https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794474262872445280?s=61

Indeed. Most would simply spend 5 weeks doing that in the summer holidays after their A-levels.

Not a big deal.

They’d rather be in Ibiza

There were nearly 4 months between me finishing A-levels and starting university.

Few can afford spending that long in Ibiza.

There are some that cannot afford not working for 5 weeks.

And yet five weeks earlier they could whilst in full-time compulsory education?

I'd expect this to be funded, even though the details aren't there yet.

Your last sentence, in a nutshell, is why this won't work in the way you hope it will.

Labour are being painfully, painfully careful to pepper every interaction with voters with caution over what we can afford.

Because the economy will dominate everything this election.

The Tories throw an utterly uncosted policy into the mix and gift Labour another few points on relative economic competence, nay relative competence at all.

What will stick after this idea sinks from the headlines is that there is only one serious party of government on offer. The other has morphed into a protest movement to bring back the past.

This isn't a completely uncosted proposal. At least some money is going to come by withdrawing funds from the levelling up budget.

The Tories have given up in "Red Wall" seats is my conclusion.

Heathener

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Security and Defence is not what Tories want to be talking about.

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

Which is what Farage has also said today.

Getting attacked from both left and right isn’t particularly smart.

Carnyx

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

ROFLMAO

Casino Ali does seem relentlessly positive today. Or do I detect a note fo irony?

DM_Andy

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

Good thread @TSE

I think you’re right about this.

Two people who have not had a good month:

Rishi Sunak
and
Laura Kuenssberg

I don't get at all the hate for Laura Kuenssberg.

She wouldn't be getting half of it if she were a bloke.

That's true, sadly it's true of any female who ever dares to have a public opinion. I don't even believe that she's a Tory stooge, I rather suspect that if SKS becomes PM she'll be a Labour stooge.

Scott_xP

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

ROFLMAO

Casino Ali does seem relentlessly positive today. Or do I detect a note fo irony?

demob happy...

RochdalePioneers

Exclusive video from yesterday's National Service policy seminar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kb5KjDAN_o

EDIT: someone has posted in the comments:

@xinisa6126
8 hours ago
Reintroduce national service, yes and ho!

Heathener

By the way, ref. ‘derision’ can I gently and very immodestly point out that 2 years ago I predicted a Labour landslide?

At the time I was derided by almost everyone on here.

Now almost everyone believes it.

Cleitophon

I just can't stand Laura Kuensberg. She is just so dishonest and partisan in her journalism. And not in the daily mail, daily express click bait, dog whistle way. She tries to present herself as an objective neutral voice when everything she does has an agenda. She is much much worse than the express.

Carnyx

TimS said:

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Genius. Except who hollowed out the armed forces over the last 14 years?

The new proposal doesn't make much sense in terms of de-hollowing them. The big problem is the MoD recruitment system, though it's no longer run by Capita. The system seemed to be designed to put off enthusiastic youngsters.

But making servicepeople into nannies and sopcial workers will make the armed forces problem even worse.

Luckyguy1983

Benpointer said:

Blimey, the comments on ConHome on the NatServ plan are unrelentingly negative.

https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/26/this-campaign-must-be-the-nadir-of-government-by-bunker/

I don't often dip into ConHome - are the commenters all lefty infiltrators?

Pretty much. It's very paid astroturfey, with vanishingly few of the old actual Tories left. The astroturfers used to pretend to be 'modernising Tories' but this seems to have been dropped lately. They should go just to party members being able to post. I'm not one, but I assume they have a membership number thing?

Foxy

Casino_Royale said:

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Security and Defence is not what Tories want to be talking about.

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

And, without Labour pledging to refund an expansion, that's just piss and wind.

Starmer pledged 2.5% for defence 2 weeks before Sunak did.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/11/keir-starmer-labour-defence-nuclear-deterrent-barrow

Scott_xP

Ipsos polling

@keiranpedley

What are the key issues this General Election?

- NHS 35%
- inflation / prices 29%
- economy 28%
- immigration 27%


So the big idea is, compulsory voluntary unpaid unsanctioned work experience for 18 year olds.

It's no wonder Armando gave up satirising these people...

Benpointer

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

Blimey, the comments on ConHome on the NatServ plan are unrelentingly negative.

https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/26/this-campaign-must-be-the-nadir-of-government-by-bunker/

I don't often dip into ConHome - are the commenters all lefty infiltrators?

It's Reform voters worried it's going to undercut Reform.

Same for much of the Mail and Telegraph comments.

Interesting, I hadn't thought of that.

I do accept that I live in my own bubble to a degree (we all do) but I will be fascinated to see if this utterly bonkers idea cuts through in a positive way with the wider electorate and surprises on the upside.

Well done for campaigning btw - even if for the wrong side ;-) Shame you decided not to stand - understandable decision though.

Stuartinromford

RochdalePioneers said:

Exclusive video from yesterday's National Service policy seminar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kb5KjDAN_o

EDIT: someone has posted in the comments:

@xinisa6126
8 hours ago
Reintroduce national service, yes and ho!

"Reduce the deficit with spending cuts".

maxh

Foxy said:

maxh said:

Reposting FPT

Casino_Royale said:

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Thread on the national service plan and the compulsory volunteering element.

I still don’t like it, but it is nowhere near as bad as some have made out.

https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794474262872445280?s=61

Indeed. Most would simply spend 5 weeks doing that in the summer holidays after their A-levels.

Not a big deal.

They’d rather be in Ibiza

There were nearly 4 months between me finishing A-levels and starting university.

Few can afford spending that long in Ibiza.

There are some that cannot afford not working for 5 weeks.

And yet five weeks earlier they could whilst in full-time compulsory education?

I'd expect this to be funded, even though the details aren't there yet.

Your last sentence, in a nutshell, is why this won't work in the way you hope it will.

Labour are being painfully, painfully careful to pepper every interaction with voters with caution over what we can afford.

Because the economy will dominate everything this election.

The Tories throw an utterly uncosted policy into the mix and gift Labour another few points on relative economic competence, nay relative competence at all.

What will stick after this idea sinks from the headlines is that there is only one serious party of government on offer. The other has morphed into a protest movement to bring back the past.

This isn't a completely uncosted proposal. At least some money is going to come by withdrawing funds from the levelling up budget.

The Tories have given up in "Red Wall" seats is my conclusion.

Yes, @lostpassword made the same point on the previous thread, lazy writing on my part. I don't mean the setup is uncosted, I was responding to Casino's claim that young people might be paid for 5 weeks work. That bit hasn't been costed has it? But it's clearly needed.

Gallowgate

Casino_Royale said:

maxh said:

Reposting FPT

Casino_Royale said:

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Thread on the national service plan and the compulsory volunteering element.

I still don’t like it, but it is nowhere near as bad as some have made out.

https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794474262872445280?s=61

Indeed. Most would simply spend 5 weeks doing that in the summer holidays after their A-levels.

Not a big deal.

They’d rather be in Ibiza

There were nearly 4 months between me finishing A-levels and starting university.

Few can afford spending that long in Ibiza.

There are some that cannot afford not working for 5 weeks.

And yet five weeks earlier they could whilst in full-time compulsory education?

I'd expect this to be funded, even though the details aren't there yet.

Your last sentence, in a nutshell, is why this won't work in the way you hope it will.

Labour are being painfully, painfully careful to pepper every interaction with voters with caution over what we can afford.

Because the economy will dominate everything this election.

The Tories throw an utterly uncosted policy into the mix and gift Labour another few points on relative economic competence, nay relative competence at all.

What will stick after this idea sinks from the headlines is that there is only one serious party of government on offer. The other has morphed into a protest movement to bring back the past.

Tories don't need to prove their credentials on public spending in the same way Labour do.

Ironic

Scott_xP

@RobDotHutton
Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.

Eabhal

Remember when people were complaining that all the attacks on Sunak were fatuous? "Moron", "Exit", "Piss up in brewery", "Wet suit", "Welsh football"

That was less than 24 hours ago.

kjh

Foxy said:

maxh said:

Reposting FPT

Casino_Royale said:

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Thread on the national service plan and the compulsory volunteering element.

I still don’t like it, but it is nowhere near as bad as some have made out.

https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794474262872445280?s=61

Indeed. Most would simply spend 5 weeks doing that in the summer holidays after their A-levels.

Not a big deal.

They’d rather be in Ibiza

There were nearly 4 months between me finishing A-levels and starting university.

Few can afford spending that long in Ibiza.

There are some that cannot afford not working for 5 weeks.

And yet five weeks earlier they could whilst in full-time compulsory education?

I'd expect this to be funded, even though the details aren't there yet.

Your last sentence, in a nutshell, is why this won't work in the way you hope it will.

Labour are being painfully, painfully careful to pepper every interaction with voters with caution over what we can afford.

Because the economy will dominate everything this election.

The Tories throw an utterly uncosted policy into the mix and gift Labour another few points on relative economic competence, nay relative competence at all.

What will stick after this idea sinks from the headlines is that there is only one serious party of government on offer. The other has morphed into a protest movement to bring back the past.

This isn't a completely uncosted proposal. At least some money is going to come by withdrawing funds from the levelling up budget.

The Tories have given up in "Red Wall" seats is my conclusion.

The rest is coming from cracking down on tax avoidance. I mean how many times has that been a magical source of funds in the past. Why now? Why not last year or the year before? Did nobody care then about this?

Carnyx

Scott_xP said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

ROFLMAO

Casino Ali does seem relentlessly positive today. Or do I detect a note fo irony?

demob happy...

Yes, he's got the date for going to collect his demob suit and gratuity. And a calendar being crossed off day by day on the barrack wall.

TOPPING

So for those remaining aspirational Cons voters, I do believe there might be one or two left on here, with young children, do they vote Lab and pay more in school fees or Cons and see their precious Violets and Harrys go off to 1 QDG.

Tough call. OR IS IT?

@Casino what's your thinking.

Dura_Ace

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Security and Defence is not what Tories want to be talking about.

Labour respond:

“This is not a plan – it’s a review which could cost billions and is only needed because the Tories hollowed out the Armed Forces to their smallest size since Napoleon.”

RN Combatant Fleet Status

Destroyers: 1 on ops, 1 working up, 4 in refit

Frigates: 2 on ops, 2 working up, rest in refit/maintenance/on the wall due to lack of crew

Carriers: 1 in maintenance, 1 in refit

SSN: All(!) Astutes in maintenance/refit. Trafalgar (aka the 'Antiques Roadshow') deployed

People who think the tories are sound on defence would do well to remember the words of Maya Angelou.

"When people show you who they really are. Believe them."

Benpointer

Casino_Royale said:

TimS said:

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Genius. Except who hollowed out the armed forces over the last 14 years?

So, Starmer could maybe spike it by pledging to raise UK defence spending to 2.5% - or more - of GDP.

Will he?

You think dumping up to 700k 18 year olds on the armed forces every year will improve our defence position?

Heathener

DM_Andy said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

Good thread @TSE

I think you’re right about this.

Two people who have not had a good month:

Rishi Sunak
and
Laura Kuenssberg

I don't get at all the hate for Laura Kuenssberg.

She wouldn't be getting half of it if she were a bloke.

That's true, sadly it's true of any female who ever dares to have a public opinion. I don't even believe that she's a Tory stooge, I rather suspect that if SKS becomes PM she'll be a Labour stooge.

Nah wait a sec. There are some great female commentators but she hasn’t had a good month. Her infamous post about the London mayoral was so off-beam and highly misleading, including for punters.

For obvious reasons I’ll defend females in any and all positions of responsibility and leadership but part of that means we have to keep up good and professional standards. We can’t let sloppy journalism pass just because she’s one of us. Laura hasn’t had a good month.

(and Beth and Sophy did a vg job during the announcement)

Dura_Ace

TOPPING said:

1 QDG.

https://www.nspcc.org.uk/

Daveyboy1961

Scott_xP said:

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

ROFLMAO

Casino Ali does seem relentlessly positive today. Or do I detect a note fo irony?

demob happy...

get some in!!

Scott_xP

@RobDotHutton

The problem, Cleverly explains, is "too many people living in their own bubble". This certainly explains why the Tories thought compulsory volunteering for 18-year-olds is a good idea.

glw

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

The policy may well be wrong, but the questions that prompt it are important. Labour on the other hand have a pitch that would make way more sense if this was still 2019, it's not vastly different from the "levelling up" that Boris was selling. I don't think Labour will get the chance to do what they want to, I expect they'll be dealing with some very big crises.

Luckyguy1983

Benpointer said:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

Blimey, the comments on ConHome on the NatServ plan are unrelentingly negative.

https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/26/this-campaign-must-be-the-nadir-of-government-by-bunker/

I don't often dip into ConHome - are the commenters all lefty infiltrators?

It's Reform voters worried it's going to undercut Reform.

Same for much of the Mail and Telegraph comments.

Interesting, I hadn't thought of that.

I do accept that I live in my own bubble to a degree (we all do) but I will be fascinated to see if this utterly bonkers idea cuts through in a positive way with the wider electorate and surprises on the upside.

Well done for campaigning btw - even if for the wrong side ;-) Shame you decided not to stand - understandable decision though.

That's bollocks - there are hardly any Reform types posting there - used to be more red-blooded Tories but they gave up the ghost a while ago. It's anti-Tory posters (Labour talking points) talking to each other now.

El_Capitano

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

..

nico679

Scott_xP said:

Ipsos polling

@keiranpedley

What are the key issues this General Election?

- NHS 35%
- inflation / prices 29%
- economy 28%
- immigration 27%


So the big idea is, compulsory voluntary unpaid unsanctioned work experience for 18 year olds.

It's no wonder Armando gave up satirising these people...

So apparently you can volunteer to go into the fire service amongst the emergency responders . How the hell do they have time to deal with this .

FeersumEnjineeya

Benpointer said:

Casino_Royale said:

Benpointer said:

Blimey, the comments on ConHome on the NatServ plan are unrelentingly negative.

https://conservativehome.com/2024/05/26/this-campaign-must-be-the-nadir-of-government-by-bunker/

I don't often dip into ConHome - are the commenters all lefty infiltrators?

It's Reform voters worried it's going to undercut Reform.

Same for much of the Mail and Telegraph comments.

Interesting, I hadn't thought of that.

I do accept that I live in my own bubble to a degree (we all do) but I will be fascinated to see if this utterly bonkers idea cuts through in a positive way with the wider electorate and surprises on the upside.

Well done for campaigning btw - even if for the wrong side ;-) Shame you decided not to stand - understandable decision though.

I'll say one thing for the Nation Service plan: it'll certainly help turnout among the young. My lad tells me that even those of his friends with little interest in politics are now determined to use their vote. It has cut right through the apathy!

Stuartinromford

Benpointer said:

Casino_Royale said:

TimS said:

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Genius. Except who hollowed out the armed forces over the last 14 years?

So, Starmer could maybe spike it by pledging to raise UK defence spending to 2.5% - or more - of GDP.

Will he?

You think dumping up to 700k 18 year olds on the armed forces every year will improve our defence position?

To be fair, they're only having 30000 teenagers doing military service. Presumably because that's all they can afford.

Most will be doing weekend shifts in the public sector... that can't be right, there will be hardly anyone to supervise them.

Carnyx

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

maxh said:

Reposting FPT

Casino_Royale said:

Eabhal said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Thread on the national service plan and the compulsory volunteering element.

I still don’t like it, but it is nowhere near as bad as some have made out.

https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1794474262872445280?s=61

Indeed. Most would simply spend 5 weeks doing that in the summer holidays after their A-levels.

Not a big deal.

They’d rather be in Ibiza

There were nearly 4 months between me finishing A-levels and starting university.

Few can afford spending that long in Ibiza.

There are some that cannot afford not working for 5 weeks.

And yet five weeks earlier they could whilst in full-time compulsory education?

I'd expect this to be funded, even though the details aren't there yet.

Your last sentence, in a nutshell, is why this won't work in the way you hope it will.

Labour are being painfully, painfully careful to pepper every interaction with voters with caution over what we can afford.

Because the economy will dominate everything this election.

The Tories throw an utterly uncosted policy into the mix and gift Labour another few points on relative economic competence, nay relative competence at all.

What will stick after this idea sinks from the headlines is that there is only one serious party of government on offer. The other has morphed into a protest movement to bring back the past.

Tories don't need to prove their credentials on public spending in the same way Labour do.

Ironic

Indeed, they've lost any chance of ever being believed. So best not even talk about it.

DM_Andy

Heathener said:

DM_Andy said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

Good thread @TSE

I think you’re right about this.

Two people who have not had a good month:

Rishi Sunak
and
Laura Kuenssberg

I don't get at all the hate for Laura Kuenssberg.

She wouldn't be getting half of it if she were a bloke.

That's true, sadly it's true of any female who ever dares to have a public opinion. I don't even believe that she's a Tory stooge, I rather suspect that if SKS becomes PM she'll be a Labour stooge.

Nah wait a sec. There are some great female commentators but she hasn’t had a good month. Her infamous post about the London mayoral was so off-beam and highly misleading, including for punters.

For obvious reasons I’ll defend females in any and all positions of responsibility and leadership but part of that means we have to keep up good and professional standards. We can’t let sloppy journalism pass just because she’s one of us. Laura hasn’t had a good month.

(and Beth and Sophy did a vg job during the announcement)

I didn't say that she was any good as a journalist, but there's plenty of male journalists that are equally poor but don't get the same abuse.

kjh

Carnyx said:

Scott_xP said:

Casino_Royale said:

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

ROFLMAO

Casino Ali does seem relentlessly positive today. Or do I detect a note fo irony?

In fairness to @Casino_Royale everyone is talking about the Tory stuff today. We might all think it is mad, but if it catches the people's interest who knows, plus nobody is talking about what Labour wants to talk about.

They say if you are in a hole stop digging, but if you are so far down you might as well give it a go; you might strike gold.

wooliedyed

So, interested to hear what you all think on this musing
The 16 to 17 votes and the NS policy for 18s will apply to nobody voting this time. I've seen comments on socials about 'youth vote' etc.... how long does 'affinity' with those to be affected by, or benefit from, a policy go on? Do 23 year olds give a shit if a 16 year old can vote?

Tres

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Cleverly on the morning rounds.

Is the national service plan falling apart already ?

https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1794633856978751610?s=61

Not at all, it's going precisely as planned and its opponents are playing right into their hands.

Comical ali photo

Clutch_Brompton

Who will enforce the National Service?
Who will administer the National Service?
Where will you house the recruits?
How will you equip the recruits?
Who will train the recruits?
How will you pay for any of the above?

When the public services and armed forces have been hollowed out as they have all of these are questions with no obvious answers.

However, given the plan is to set up a Royal Commission there is zero chance of its reporting before the re-elected Con Govt or Mr Sunak or both have left office.

I see why they are doing this but wasn't the idea that the GE campaign would focus all eyes on Starmer and show up the gaps in his plans? Focusing on your own unrealistic proposals (abolish national insurance, introduce national service, space colony on Mars (well why not)) doesn't help with that does it.

Young folk are notoriously difficult to get to the polls. However, I think the Cons just gave a lot of students and youngsters (as well as their parents) a very good reason to turn out.

nico679

Scott_xP said:

@RobDotHutton
Cleverly now at the If You Don't Support This You're Against Investing In Young People stage.

It really is desperate stuff . Forcing 18 year olds to volunteer is investing in them .

Northern_Al

Sunak has missed an opportunity to make his policy offer into a coherent package. He should amend it to:

All 18 year-olds will serve their county by working in shifts to form a human chain all around the Kent coastline to STOP THE BOATS.

Heathener

DM_Andy said:

Heathener said:

DM_Andy said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

Good thread @TSE

I think you’re right about this.

Two people who have not had a good month:

Rishi Sunak
and
Laura Kuenssberg

I don't get at all the hate for Laura Kuenssberg.

She wouldn't be getting half of it if she were a bloke.

That's true, sadly it's true of any female who ever dares to have a public opinion. I don't even believe that she's a Tory stooge, I rather suspect that if SKS becomes PM she'll be a Labour stooge.

Nah wait a sec. There are some great female commentators but she hasn’t had a good month. Her infamous post about the London mayoral was so off-beam and highly misleading, including for punters.

For obvious reasons I’ll defend females in any and all positions of responsibility and leadership but part of that means we have to keep up good and professional standards. We can’t let sloppy journalism pass just because she’s one of us. Laura hasn’t had a good month.

(and Beth and Sophy did a vg job during the announcement)

I didn't say that she was any good as a journalist, but there's plenty of male journalists that are equally poor but don't get the same abuse.

Very very true.

Some of the attacks on her are also anti-semitic of course

Mexicanpete

Heathener said:

DM_Andy said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

Good thread @TSE

I think you’re right about this.

Two people who have not had a good month:

Rishi Sunak
and
Laura Kuenssberg

I don't get at all the hate for Laura Kuenssberg.

She wouldn't be getting half of it if she were a bloke.

That's true, sadly it's true of any female who ever dares to have a public opinion. I don't even believe that she's a Tory stooge, I rather suspect that if SKS becomes PM she'll be a Labour stooge.

Nah wait a sec. There are some great female commentators but she hasn’t had a good month. Her infamous post about the London mayoral was so off-beam and highly misleading, including for punters.

For obvious reasons I’ll defend females in any and all positions of responsibility and leadership but part of that means we have to keep up good and professional standards. We can’t let sloppy journalism pass just because she’s one of us. Laura hasn’t had a good month.

(and Beth and Sophy did a vg job during the announcement)

So despite Ofcom rules on partisanship, the BBC editorial line via Laura Kuenssberg is now one of "vote, vote, vote for Rishi Sunak".

bigjohnowls

On Topic Sir John Curtice seems less convinced by these factors.

He reckoned boundaries would go against a Labour Maj. too.

I believe he was saying on the BBC

10% Likely NOM

13% Likely Maj Lab

The actual point of a 1 Maj being somewhere between the to.

Scott_xP

@nickdebois

Let’s be honest - this is the first election for some time I remember a substantive discussion about young people, based on a policy specifically aimed at those young people.

@RobDotHutton

"Sure, people criticise our plan for annual Hunger Games, but..."

biggles

Once again, it needs to be said. This is a terrible Government and it will fall, but the facts of life are that the Starmer Government will have to bring in a form of national service to increase the pool with basic training that could be swiftly mobilised if we had to. That’s happening all over Europe and it will happen here too, unless we want to be a joke nation and abandon on our leadership on European defence.

MattW

Good morning everyone.

A cat is on topic. What happened?

Foxy

Casino_Royale said:

TimS said:

Casino_Royale said:

WhatsApp update: conversation has now moved on from hysteria and derision at the policy to recognising it's probably not as awful as advertised, but it's just not costed, and has pivoted to debating wider UK security and defence policy, and how the UK needs to up its spend and skills in this area.

So, now, everyone's talking about security and defence. Not Labour's preferred 'cost of living' line on their grid for this weekend.

That'll do them nicely.

Genius. Except who hollowed out the armed forces over the last 14 years?

So, Starmer could maybe spike it by pledging to raise UK defence spending to 2.5% - or more - of GDP.

Will he?

He did on April 11th, 2 weeks before Sunak did.

It really isn't the gotcha that you think.

Starmers approach to this is of an experienced barrister, with the defendant in the witness box destroying his own defence in front of the Jury. Do not interrupt.