Quite a journey Rishi Sunak has gone on, politically. Only two years ago he was cutting back the National Citizens Service (in a budget where near-everything got a real-terms increase!). Now he wants to make it a condition to working on Whitehall.
The whole reason the Tories were so desperate to join the EEC and the Single Market is that they would stop absurd autarkic Bennery... Like making graduate schemes prioritise volunteers from state boondoggles. How lost they have become.
It's increasingly depressing how useless your posts are. And I'd like to +1 some of the sentiment in some of them. But really - twitter @'s are entirely useless unless you link directly to the tweet. You might as well be posting "@djfghdjhfgdkfg Labour are now the government and we have formed a first colony on Europa!"
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
Erm. They don’t though do they? Sorry, but facts matter.
Even the Prince of Wales just did taster stuff. And I certainly don’t recall the likes of Princess Eugenie in uniform. Going back a generation, Prince Edward chickened out.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
Fight an election on protecting private schools and you will lose.
Nothing to do with arguments or morality it is simply a case of numbers.
I know that. But morality should play a part. I am no fan of private schools either in concept or execution but they are merely an expression of the urge of the wealthy to give their children the best education they can pay for, and for the life of me I don't feel the need to stop them. Wealth redistribution should be done via redistributive taxation, not thru actions like this.
Remembered earlier about the Assisted Places Scheme, which New Labour also canned:
Too many working class people getting ideas above their station, no doubt.
I remember Dr John Rae, then the Head of Westminster, saying that trying to solve education via the assisted places scheme was a little bit like trying to solve child hunger by taking a few lucky kids to lunch at the Ritz. And it's hard to not to agree with that.
Erm. They don’t though do they? Sorry, but facts matter.
Even the Prince of Wales just did taster stuff. And I certainly don’t recall the likes of Princess Eugenie in uniform. Going back a generation, Prince Edward chickened out.
@Samfr As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
Why would it? Do you have absolutely no critical faculties?
Bit unfair, it's certainly one of the two logical conclusions one can draw.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all. B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
The whole reason the Tories were so desperate to join the EEC and the Single Market is that they would stop absurd autarkic Bennery... Like making graduate schemes prioritise volunteers from state boondoggles. How lost they have become.
It's increasingly depressing how useless your posts are. And I'd like to +1 some of the sentiment in some of them. But really - twitter @'s are entirely useless unless you link directly to the tweet. You might as well be posting "@djfghdjhfgdkfg Labour are now the government and we have formed a first colony on Europa!"
Scott, don't forget some of us can't even see the blasted tweet till we have the URL for the specific tweet - just gtiving us the twatter handle for the culprit is no good as it just gives us a random selection from about the Crimean WAr era.
Erm. They don’t though do they? Sorry, but facts matter.
Even the Prince of Wales just did taster stuff. And I certainly don’t recall the likes of Princess Eugenie in uniform. Going back a generation, Prince Edward chickened out.
The Mail is stuck a generation or two ago. PtG, Charles, Andrew, assorted others I forget, all put in real time, and even Edward's time in the Marines would probably qualify him for the new Carolingian National Service Medal First Class.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
So we don't know our own minds, which are tainted by group think, but you do?
I bow to no-one in my ability to call things wrong, so it is surely possible, but I do feel fairly confident in saying I'm not known for leaping to the most extreme positive or negative interpretations of events. So if I think something is bad I'm really not just going with the flow.
And this national service announcement and follow up is hands down the worst political move I've seen in years. I did not think the Tories might be at existential risk before, whereas now I think it is the most probable option.
@Samfr As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
Why would it? Do you have absolutely no critical faculties?
Bit unfair, it's certainly one of the two logical conclusions one can draw.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all. B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
Alternatively:
a) No same Government would even let that happen; so
b) In the “pigs might fly” scenario that the Tories actually won, we have to conclude there will be other, probably quite racists and damaging, restrictions on immigrants.
I actively want this government to lose, I just think facts matter, and it should lose for things that are true. It has many sins in its record.
Fight an election on protecting private schools and you will lose.
Nothing to do with arguments or morality it is simply a case of numbers.
I know that. But morality should play a part. I am no fan of private schools either in concept or execution but they are merely an expression of the urge of the wealthy to give their children the best education they can pay for, and for the life of me I don't feel the need to stop them. Wealth redistribution should be done via redistributive taxation, not thru actions like this.
Remembered earlier about the Assisted Places Scheme, which New Labour also canned:
Too many working class people getting ideas above their station, no doubt.
I remember Dr John Rae, then the Head of Westminster, saying that trying to solve education via the assisted places scheme was a little bit like trying to solve child hunger by taking a few lucky kids to lunch at the Ritz. And it's hard to not to agree with that.
Intderesting. I wonder if he was deliberately echoing the old crack about English justice being freely accessible to all, like the Ritz: just so long as one could pay.
@Samfr As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
Why would it? Do you have absolutely no critical faculties?
Bit unfair, it's certainly one of the two logical conclusions one can draw.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all. B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
Alternatively:
a) No same Government would even let that happen; so
b) In the “pigs might fly” scenario that the Tories actually won, we have to conclude there will be other, probably quite racists and damaging, restrictions on immigrants.
I actively want this government to lose, I just think facts matter, and it should lose for things that are true. It has many sins in its record.
Mm. But hypothetical facts matter too, as do their inherent illogicalities.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
If you don't spend 12 weekends working for the community helping public services then we shall ban you from offering your labour to work for public services.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
So we don't know our own minds, which are tainted by group think, but you do?
I bow to no-one in my ability to call things wrong, so it is surely possible, but I do feel fairly confident in saying I'm not known for leaping to the most extreme positive or negative interpretations of events. So if I think something is bad I'm really not just going with the flow.
And this national service announcement and follow up is hands down the worst political move I've seen in years. I did not think the Tories might be at existential risk before, whereas now I think it is the most probable option.
You haven’t considered waiting for, you know, evidence? This all reminds me of this site in 2017 when it failed to understand that some human being might actually like what Corbyn had to offer.
Now I won’t stretch than analogy too far. The Tories aren’t going to win. But I also don’t think they are trying to particularly. If your max target is 35% and you’d be happy at 32%, this site isn’t where your voters live.
Far too many of you have forgotten what something like the 2001 Tory campaign looked like.
Surprised there haven't been more reports of Tory MPs trying to distance themselves from the leadership after the last few days, other than probably the usual suspects.
Granted it is a Sunday, and many are deeply despondent about their chances anyway, but I can't see discipline being maintained in this campaign to remain on message.
"Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
"Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
Richi made his first post on Tik Tok today.
Yes, it's just as shit as you are imagining
He should be banning that Chinese spyware shit not posting on it.
@Samfr As @thhamilton notes it would also make it easier for an immigrant to get a public sector job than a Brit. Just so much genius.
Why would it? Do you have absolutely no critical faculties?
Bit unfair, it's certainly one of the two logical conclusions one can draw.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all. B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
Alternatively:
a) No same Government would even let that happen; so
b) In the “pigs might fly” scenario that the Tories actually won, we have to conclude there will be other, probably quite racists and damaging, restrictions on immigrants.
I actively want this government to lose, I just think facts matter, and it should lose for things that are true. It has many sins in its record.
Mm. But hypothetical facts matter too, as do their inherent illogicalities.
But honestly, suggesting THIS Government, that wants to ship asylum seekers off to Rwanda, would favour immigrants over citizens? It’s someone on Twitter trying to be too clever by half.
The real point to skewer them with is that they haven’t thought through the policy because they know they won’t win.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
So we don't know our own minds, which are tainted by group think, but you do?
I bow to no-one in my ability to call things wrong, so it is surely possible, but I do feel fairly confident in saying I'm not known for leaping to the most extreme positive or negative interpretations of events. So if I think something is bad I'm really not just going with the flow.
And this national service announcement and follow up is hands down the worst political move I've seen in years. I did not think the Tories might be at existential risk before, whereas now I think it is the most probable option.
You haven’t considered waiting for, you know, evidence? This all reminds me of this site in 2017 when it failed to understand that some human being might actually like what Corbyn had to offer.
Now I won’t stretch than analogy too far. The Tories aren’t going to win. But I also don’t think they are trying to particularly. If your max target is 35% and you’d be happy at 32%, this site isn’t where your voters live.
Far too many of you have forgotten what something like the 2001 Tory campaign looked like.
I respond to evidence when it emerges and change my views accordingly, but we respond to breaking news and rumour - by your logic we should never proffer a view on something until we can see definitively what impact it has, and usually that would be some way down the line. How long are we supposed to wait here before having a view on the potential impact?
Your initial post doesn't even make any sense on its own terms since it seems to suggest you disagree with the view of twitter - which is indeed generally a good strategy - but you would be doing so without 'evidence', whatever that might be in this context. Why aren't you waiting for evidence before declaring you look forward to taking other people's money, presumably as they will be wrong?
No, I throw out my immediate thoughts on events, and then if I am proven wrong I get egg on my face and have to put my hand up and own being a fool.
But being proven wrong later doesn't bother me, so I just respond honestly - usually I am much more equivocal, but this stuff looks like a disaster. If this is what 2001 was like then it must have been a wild and depressing ride for Tories.
By the end of the campaign I fully expect to have a Leon-esque range of predictions I have made.
Honestly this site is pure group think at times, almost entirely aligned to Twitter.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
Curious. Perhaps Harry Cole and the Daily Mail are part of the leftie liberal blob...
No, they are just stupid. Who mentioned “the blob”? Don’t mistake me for a supporter of the government. All that “blob” nonsense is why I want them gone. The culture war idiocy and the JRM notes on desks.
What I am shouting at the sky about is the pathetic, infantile level of debate centred on half truths and lies. People should debate the actual issues and real facts on the ground. But no one wants to. They want to play their silly Twitter games. They want “their side” to win and that’s it.
To be honest, the Labour line on this is better than all this Twitter crap - it’s desperate ill-thought through rubbish.
There is a serious underlying debate though, which is about a proper modern form of national service, modelled after the Scandis, which we will end up doing anyway so we all ought to discuss the pros and cons. But we won’t. There will be silly Twitter jokes now, and then it will just happen three years down the line, and no one will ever have actually debated it.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I remember when 99s where 99p....
It is why Biden is in trouble. $15 for McDs.
You can stick all your CPI / RPI falling to 2% where the sun doesn't shine, when people go to the pub, for a takeaway, an ice cream and the prices are twice what they were used to paying, it hits hard even if you can afford it.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I remember when 99s where 99p....
It is why Biden is in trouble. $15 for McDs.
You can stick all your CPI / RPI where the sun doesn't shine, when people go to the pub, for a takeaway, an ice cream and the prices are twice what they were used to paying, it hits hard.
And he'd only take cards. Standing there with my bloody cash. Lost @anabobzina's vote. Bet he can hear me.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I remember when 99s where 99p....
It is why Biden is in trouble. $15 for McDs.
You can stick all your CPI / RPI falling to 2% where the sun doesn't shine, when people go to the pub, for a takeaway, an ice cream and the prices are twice what they were used to paying, it hits hard even if you can afford it.
bondegezou said: "UK imports of oil are overwhelmingly from Norway and the US, neither of whom particularly hate us:" In fact, most Americans like you: "At the top of the list are Canada (83%), Japan (83%) and Great Britain (82%). Germany, France and Taiwan are all just a notch below, viewed favorably by between 77% and 79%.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
Who on earth will be attracted by it? Even those who might support the principle will realise it’s completely unworkable. To take one obvious example, are 18 years olds who already have a full time job going to have to take part in this (unpaid) nonsense.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
Who on earth will be attracted by it? Even those who might support the principle will realise it’s completely unworkable. To take one obvious example, are 18 years olds who already have a full time job going to have to take part in this (unpaid) nonsense.
The thing is you could attract the same voters with something slightly more realistic, like volunteer for good causes and we will give you credit towards uni costs etc. We will expand Territorial Army, and again you can get a uni discount or some money off loan repayment if you carry on.
It does all the same virtue signally, about giving back is good, mixing with people you might never normally meet is good. Sunak could do the whole when I was at school I did this, it was very rewarding.
It won't get the kids vote, but the oldies will more likely decent bloke, that seems ok.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
Who on earth will be attracted by it? Even those who might support the principle will realise it’s completely unworkable. To take one obvious example, are 18 years olds who already have a full time job going to have to take part in this (unpaid) nonsense.
I did point out yesterday that more than 10% of the TA'S (who we can't recruit cos of shocking pay and conditions) are 18. They'd just love some unpaid busywork on top of their everyday bollocks.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
It is why I can't quite get my head around why we haven't had a massive crash (yet).
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
i don't think voters hate Sunak because he's brown. They hate him because he's crap. I'm sure the Cons will vote in another non-white leader soon, probably sooner if Suella gets access to edged weapons.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s strictly true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale.
I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. I think that is much more of an issue than the fact he isn't white.
That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Agree. I often forget that Sunak is the first non-white PM. It’s hardly ever remarked upon.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
Who on earth will be attracted by it? Even those who might support the principle will realise it’s completely unworkable. To take one obvious example, are 18 years olds who already have a full time job going to have to take part in this (unpaid) nonsense.
I did point out yesterday that more than 10% of the TA'S (who we can't recruit cos of shocking pay and conditions) are 18. They'd just love some unpaid busywork on top of their everyday bollocks.
Truly the UNPAID nature of non-military compulsory "National Service" is perhaps the worst part of the proposal. Along with recognition of situation of youth who are already gainfully employed and/or attending school full-time, often more that 40 hours already.
At gathering of locals at neighborhood coffee shop, even those believing national service is a concept worth considering (including me) found the unpaid nature of compulsory "volunteer" service off-putting, to put it mildly.
Ideally, true national service should be a school for the youth of the nation, and aiding to the present and future welfare of the nation. Including providing some income - not munificent but reasonable - for said youths AND in many cases their families.
Sorta like the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps) and similar programs established under FDR during the New Deal. America is still littered, but in a good way, with testimonials to work they did and things they built in thousands of communities from Sea to Shining Sea.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
It is why I can't quite get my head around why we haven't had a massive crash (yet).
Only thing I can think is people banging it on credit cards, but that can't last long. £60 a day would pay for @Casino_Royale 's school for a kid.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
It is why I can't quite get my head around why we haven't had a massive crash (yet).
Only thing I can think is people banging it on credit cards, but that can't last long. £60 a day would pay for @Casino_Royale 's school for a kid.
I believe household debt has actually declined in recent times.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
That's why there are some families for whom McDonalds is a rare treat.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Agree. I often forget that Sunak is the first non-white PM. It’s hardly ever remarked upon.
There have been leading non-white politicians during Tory era and that didn't seem to effect the vote share or particularly unpopular e.g. Sajid Javid.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
I have no problem spending £500 on a meal for two in principle. But £60 on a small family Pizza Hut?
BTW In Durham (I'm as far south as Doncaster today which is the other thing - this isn't southern PH prices) there is an astonishingly good (absolutely Michelin star quality) restaurant that will give you a six course tasting menu for £55/head - and the wine for roughly another £30: https://www.coarse.restaurant/6-course-tasting-menu-restaurant-durham
There's something else very odd going on here and I assume it's rent seeking somewhere.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
Oddly enough, I saw a post somewhere which was claiming that the comments under a Liverpool newspaper article about the national service idea were apparently getting mostly positive responses, which is interesting because of course the city is usually the worst place in the country for the Tories. (Trying to find the article myself atm).
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
I have no problem spending £500 on a meal for two in principle. But £60 on a small family Pizza Hut?
BTW In Durham (I'm as far south as Doncaster today which is the other thing - this isn't southern PH prices) there is an astonishingly good (absolutely Michelin star quality) restaurant that will give you a six course tasting menu for £55/head - and the wine for roughly another £30: https://www.coarse.restaurant/6-course-tasting-menu-restaurant-durham
There's something else very odd going on here and I assume it's rent seeking somewhere.
Remember that minimum wage has gone up significantly as have raw ingredients. Those low end chain restaurants work on much smaller margins than high end based on cheap labour and ingredients, so those increases have to be pushed to the customer.
The raw ingredients for high end restaurants isn't that much higher, the value add is the skill of the chefs. There is only so much more things like wild mushroom costs, even if they were harvested by wild boars.
Oddly enough, I saw a post somewhere which was claiming that the comments under a Liverpool newspaper article about the national service idea were apparently getting mostly positive responses, which is interesting because of course the city is usually the worst place in the country for the Tories. (Trying to find the article myself atm).
I checked the same comments and... it wasn't true:
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
Not necessarily at all, rightwingers like Meloni and Poilievre actually lead now with under 30s. A Labour government failing on the economy and increasing their taxes and leading to higher interest rates on their fees and mortgages while also not raising home ownership would soon see many of them switch back.
The Tories also now lead less with pensioners than they did, in France and Canada left Liberals Macron and Trudeau actually poll better with pensioners than the young
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Agree. I often forget that Sunak is the first non-white PM. It’s hardly ever remarked upon.
One one hand, this says very good things about today's Britain the British, individually and collectively.
On other hand, it speaks ill of Rishi Sunak's seeming inability to get any boost let alone traction from his historic status; unlike Margaret Thatcher who clearly DID get a bump from being the first woman PM, all while NOT dwelling on it herself - just doing it.
Part and parcel of his under-performance as a politico, in No. 10 or on the campaign trail.
Re: the first point, think the same is true of conservative Republicans who are willing and able to vote for and actually elect fellow conservatives who are People of Color (as well say in the USA) as Governors, Senators and even Presidents & Vice Presidents.
My own observation, is that, at least in US, voters do NOT object to minority-group candidates who sometimes talk about their heritage and ethnicity, religion, national origin, and occasionally act upon it. For example, when Nikki Haley ordered the lowering of the Confederate flag in South Carolina and Tim Scott strongly supported this. Local and national conservatives, including Trump supporters, mostly also supported or at least went along.
As for White progressives & liberals, they are very open to electing minority candidates, indeed many would prefer to vote for a Black, Asian, Native American, Muslim, etc. candidate if that's a resonable option; indeed, can be a big help in a crowded field and/or tight race.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. I think that is much more of an issue than the fact he isn't white.
That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Maybe but internationally the perception will be the UK got a non white PM and the voters rejected him by a landslide for white male Starmer. India in particular will not be impressed I suspect
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
i don't think voters hate Sunak because he's brown. They hate him because he's crap. I'm sure the Cons will vote in another non-white leader soon, probably sooner if Suella gets access to edged weapons.
No I suspect Steve Barclay even Rees Mogg are more likely Tory leaders than her in the next decade if Sunak loses. Outside of big cities like London the perception will be that the UK as a whole is not ready to elect an ethnic minority leader
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. I think that is much more of an issue than the fact he isn't white.
That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Maybe but internationally the perception will be the UK got a non white PM and the voters rejected him by a landslide for white male Starmer. India in particular will not be impressed I suspect
I think a bigger perceptual problem for the Tories is non-white people like Sajid Javid, who are intelligent, hard working, non-offensive to the electorate, and performed generally pretty well at high ranking jobs in government are all offski.
I am not sure the other non-white ones that are rising to the top by default are anywhere near as high quality, which might get that negative perceptive loop.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
Without compiling stats or doing any research, reckon that you're tooooo high saying USA is twice as expensive.
It IS cheaper to eat out if you do it outside major metro areas of America. Though it's still getting more expensive, especially when you factor in factors such as USers driving farther on average for a non-home cooked meal that UKers.
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
I have no problem spending £500 on a meal for two in principle. But £60 on a small family Pizza Hut?
BTW In Durham (I'm as far south as Doncaster today which is the other thing - this isn't southern PH prices) there is an astonishingly good (absolutely Michelin star quality) restaurant that will give you a six course tasting menu for £55/head - and the wine for roughly another £30: https://www.coarse.restaurant/6-course-tasting-menu-restaurant-durham
There's something else very odd going on here and I assume it's rent seeking somewhere.
Remember that minimum wage has gone up significantly as have raw ingredients. Those low end chain restaurants work on much smaller margins than high end based on cheap labour and ingredients, so those increases have to be pushed to the customer.
The raw ingredients for high end restaurants isn't that much higher, the value add is the skill of the chefs. There is only so much more things like wild mushroom costs, even if they were harvested by wild boars.
Good point - suspect they're doomed then cause who the hell is gonna get a £60 pizza hut when you can pay a few quid more for something decent. There were only about 3 tables taken. Mind you we'd walked there as the second choice as the Beefeater nearby was fully booked (or so they said - it only looked about half full to me - staffing?). So it remains decades since I've been in a Beefeater still
(While I'm unnecessarily telling irrelevant personal travel anecdotes - a service I'm providing as the usual lushes don't seem to be around this evening - the only reason the situation arose at all is cause the spa suites at the hotel Mrs Dumbosaurus and I are staying at don't accept under 18s, as I found out a couple of days ago when I called up to ask for a cot. Essentially they're just suites with a jacuzzi and sauna in so I can only assume either teenagers have been trashing the place or someone baked a toddler; doesn't make sense. Anwyays so I've had to sweet talk Mother Dumbosaurus into coming down as well in a nearby hotel to look after Baby Dumbosaurus for the night. And her Premier Inn cost me less than the PIzza Hut even at that late notice. Things just don't make sense.)
Is Sunak really hated or just oh FFS he is shit isn't? That is something quite different.
Osborne was genuinely hated for many years, but conversely people didn't really doubt he could do the job (yes we know pasty tax, but in general). He was the classic villainous Tory cutting benefits, portrayed as ruthlessly doing his job with a twinkle in his eye taking away money from the poor / disabled while eating his fancy burger.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. I think that is much more of an issue than the fact he isn't white.
That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Maybe but internationally the perception will be the UK got a non white PM and the voters rejected him by a landslide for white male Starmer. India in particular will not be impressed I suspect
I think a bigger perceptual problem for the Tories is non-white people like Sajid Javid, who are intelligent, hard working, non-offensive to the electorate, and performed generally pretty well at high ranking jobs in government are all offski.
I am not sure the other non-white ones that are rising to the top by default are anywhere near as high quality, which might get that negative perceptive loop.
Must also be noted though that even Obama was only elected by the black vote, most white Americans voted for McCain and Romney. Unfortunately for Rishi the British Hindu vote is not big enough to help get him over the line.
Having said that not much chance of India electing a white PM anytime soon either
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
You might be right there. How many times have we been promised a youthquake that never shows up? Instead, there's the slow creep upwards in the average age of a Conservative voter until the point now where they've lost every age cohort other than pensioners. And that, as you say, is more damaging in the long run.
However, one thing I have heard a lot from friends and acquaintances under 30 has been "there's nothing between Labour and Conservative any more, I'm voting green". The Conservatives putting clear water between themselves and Labour by going full Captain Mainwaring may drive some of those voters back to Labour.
Maybe I'm wrong and this is a genius core vote strategy that will see Reform voters flocking back to the Tories. But I think it will repel as many voters as it appeals to, and will drive yet more don't knows and Greens over to Labour.
The other thing it does is closes the Conservative Party to anyone with a remotely libertarian leaning. There was a time when social conservatives and libertarians could just about rub shoulders in the same party. There are plenty of posters here who fit into the "socially liberal but economically dry" category who were once natural Conservative voters who are now repelled by the lurch to hard right authoritarian "populism".
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
Not necessarily at all, rightwingers like Meloni and Poilievre actually lead now with under 30s. A Labour government failing on the economy and increasing their taxes and leading to higher interest rates on their fees and mortgages while also not raising home ownership would soon see many of them switch back.
The Tories also now lead less with pensioners than they did, in France and Canada left Liberals Macron and Trudeau actually poll better with pensioners than the young
That doesn't mean they are any more popular with young people. It just means they have managed to piss off some of their core vote.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
You might be right there. How many times have we been promised a youthquake that never shows up? Instead, there's the slow creep upwards in the average age of a Conservative voter until the point now where they've lost every age cohort other than pensioners. And that, as you say, is more damaging in the long run.
However, one thing I have heard a lot from friends and acquaintances under 30 has been "there's nothing between Labour and Conservative any more, I'm voting green". The Conservatives putting clear water between themselves and Labour by going full Captain Mainwaring may drive some of those voters back to Labour.
Maybe I'm wrong and this is a genius core vote strategy that will see Reform voters flocking back to the Tories. But I think it will repel as many voters as it appeals to, and will drive yet more don't knows and Greens over to Labour.
The other thing it does is closes the Conservative Party to anyone with a remotely libertarian leaning. There was a time when social conservatives and libertarians could just about rub shoulders in the same party. There are plenty of posters here who fit into the "socially liberal but economically dry" category who were once natural Conservative voters who are now repelled by the lurch to hard right authoritarian "populism".
Unfortunately for them most voters in the key redwall swing seats Starmer and Sunak are targeting are socially conservative but economically more wet and statist
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Closer to 20 than 30 I think is now possible. 25 if they do well.
What is the lowest Tory score in modern history?
If modern is since 1918, it's 31% for Major in 1997. In 1832 the Tories polled 29.2% under Wellington.
Yeah they are going to beat that to the downside this time around.
Unfortunately if the first non white PM gets the lowest voteshare for his party since universal suffrage I fear that kills off the likelihood of an ethnic minority leader leading the Conservatives again for a generation. It probably doesn't help the chances of non white potential Labour leaders either
I really don't think Sunak being non-white is effecting the Tory vote share. Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, having a incredibly wealthy PM at the moment isn't a good look, which isn't help by his gaffes where he looks very out of touch. I think that is much more of an issue than the fact he isn't white.
That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
Maybe but internationally the perception will be the UK got a non white PM and the voters rejected him by a landslide for white male Starmer. India in particular will not be impressed I suspect
I think a bigger perceptual problem for the Tories is non-white people like Sajid Javid, who are intelligent, hard working, non-offensive to the electorate, and performed generally pretty well at high ranking jobs in government are all offski.
I am not sure the other non-white ones that are rising to the top by default are anywhere near as high quality, which might get that negative perceptive loop.
Must also be noted though that even Obama was only elected by the black vote, most white Americans voted for McCain and Romney. Unfortunately for Rishi the British Hindu vote is not big enough to help get him over the line.
Having said that not much chance of India electing a white PM anytime soon either
Those were the days when US had two candidates that weren't out of their minds. McCain a war hero, a decent guy, but just wrong time / too old. Romney just too out of touch, but not a raving loony mentaller (ok he is a Mormon, but look at how low the bar is these days).
9 bloody quid for 2 ice creams may be resonating more than all your fancy ads.
I took Baby Dumbosaurus, Mrs Dumbosaurus, and Mother Dumbosaurus out for a PIzza Hut this evening. First time I'd been to one in over a decade. Cost over £60 for a "sharing" pizza, wings, a flatbread, and some drinks. Couldn't believe that, how do people without financial resources manage it???
I feel like food, including eating out, has essentially doubled in four years. I don’t know if that’s true, but that’s what it feels like.
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale. I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
Eating out in the US is generally about twice as expensive as it would be the UK for the same type of food/experience imo, although that's based mostly on Boston, New York, Washington DC. It may be cheaper elsewhere.
I have no problem spending £500 on a meal for two in principle. But £60 on a small family Pizza Hut?
BTW In Durham (I'm as far south as Doncaster today which is the other thing - this isn't southern PH prices) there is an astonishingly good (absolutely Michelin star quality) restaurant that will give you a six course tasting menu for £55/head - and the wine for roughly another £30: https://www.coarse.restaurant/6-course-tasting-menu-restaurant-durham
There's something else very odd going on here and I assume it's rent seeking somewhere.
Remember that minimum wage has gone up significantly as have raw ingredients. Those low end chain restaurants work on much smaller margins than high end based on cheap labour and ingredients, so those increases have to be pushed to the customer.
The raw ingredients for high end restaurants isn't that much higher, the value add is the skill of the chefs. There is only so much more things like wild mushroom costs, even if they were harvested by wild boars.
In addition to raises in minimum wages, there's been (at least in Seattle) considerable wage pressure due to wage competition within & from outside hospitality industry, with service staff having some leverage as a consequence.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
You might be right there. How many times have we been promised a youthquake that never shows up? Instead, there's the slow creep upwards in the average age of a Conservative voter until the point now where they've lost every age cohort other than pensioners. And that, as you say, is more damaging in the long run.
However, one thing I have heard a lot from friends and acquaintances under 30 has been "there's nothing between Labour and Conservative any more, I'm voting green". The Conservatives putting clear water between themselves and Labour by going full Captain Mainwaring may drive some of those voters back to Labour.
Maybe I'm wrong and this is a genius core vote strategy that will see Reform voters flocking back to the Tories. But I think it will repel as many voters as it appeals to, and will drive yet more don't knows and Greens over to Labour.
The other thing it does is closes the Conservative Party to anyone with a remotely libertarian leaning. There was a time when social conservatives and libertarians could just about rub shoulders in the same party. There are plenty of posters here who fit into the "socially liberal but economically dry" category who were once natural Conservative voters who are now repelled by the lurch to hard right authoritarian "populism".
I've done some constituency level analysis and found that Green votes are likely piling up in Labour safe seats, while Reform votes are much more widespread. This is based on age distribution, housing tenure and the YouGov megapoll.
As such, you have large Reform votes in some Labour:Tory marginals. I'd guesstimate that a Reform > Tory switcher is 2x or 3x as important as a Green > Labour one.
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer, stick with nurse as economy is turning corner and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
Sunak is setting new standards in campaigning.
Low ones, but record lows...
David Herdson asks the question, what happens if you run a campaign as bad as T May. but you start 20 points behind instead of 20 points ahead...
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
Not necessarily at all, rightwingers like Meloni and Poilievre actually lead now with under 30s. A Labour government failing on the economy and increasing their taxes and leading to higher interest rates on their fees and mortgages while also not raising home ownership would soon see many of them switch back.
The Tories also now lead less with pensioners than they did, in France and Canada left Liberals Macron and Trudeau actually poll better with pensioners than the young
That doesn't mean they are any more popular with young people. It just means they have managed to piss off some of their core vote.
The quickest way for the Tories to revive amongst the young is ironically a Labour government. The only time the Tories have won 18 to 35 year olds since Thatcher won them in 1979 and 1983 was under Cameron in 2010 when voters were fed up of Labour and their economic failings in government
I was reasonably confident when the GE was called that the Tories would eventually poll 30% with a enough scare the horses attacks on Starmer and standard Tory type offering.
Seems highly unlikely now.
I'm not sure. The policy may attract as many voters are it repels, which would leave us where we were before, which was 30% is possible.
I will be shocked if it really attracts that many people. It just isn't a serious policy. Now they doubling down in the fantasy.
Its not like saying we will raise IHT threshold (it might be difficult to cost, but it is something that is definitely actionable).
Labour have a phenomenal opportunity here.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I think it will make only a small difference to youth turnout:
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in 2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
Not necessarily at all, rightwingers like Meloni and Poilievre actually lead now with under 30s. A Labour government failing on the economy and increasing their taxes and leading to higher interest rates on their fees and mortgages while also not raising home ownership would soon see many of them switch back.
The Tories also now lead less with pensioners than they did, in France and Canada left Liberals Macron and Trudeau actually poll better with pensioners than the young
That doesn't mean they are any more popular with young people. It just means they have managed to piss off some of their core vote.
The quickest way for the Tories to revive amongst the young is ironically a Labour government. The only time the Tories have won 18 to 35 year olds since Thatcher won them in 1979 and 1983 was under Cameron in 2010 when voters were fed up of Labour and their economic failings in government
Comments
Quite a journey Rishi Sunak has gone on, politically. Only two years ago he was cutting back the National Citizens Service (in a budget where near-everything got a real-terms increase!). Now he wants to make it a condition to working on Whitehall.
Low ones, but record lows...
Quite fucking incredible.
Harry Cole
@MrHarryCole
·
54m
Obviously.
They’re royals!!
They do it already.
Ugh.
https://x.com/MrHarryCole/status/1794837506007163352
Even the Prince of Wales just did taster stuff. And I certainly don’t recall the likes of Princess Eugenie in uniform. Going back a generation, Prince Edward chickened out.
A. NS Grads from the UK and Immigrants are given first dibs/any chance at all.
B. Only NS Grads ... ditto.
And if B happens, don't you think that all the ambassadors and so on will be happy? Just think of all the Brexit deals with lots of welcomes for immigrants to come and work in the UK.
I look forward to talking some of your money.
@DavidGauke
It really is quite possible that trying to focus your electoral appeal on UKIP/Brexit Party/Reform UK voters comes with rather significant downsides.
https://x.com/DavidGauke/status/1794846858235507136
https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1794849655739847120
https://x.com/Samfr/status/1794817034338844879?t=tIb6TxaRAqd71XJVrSEIqA&s=19
I bow to no-one in my ability to call things wrong, so it is surely possible, but I do feel fairly confident in saying I'm not known for leaping to the most extreme positive or negative interpretations of events. So if I think something is bad I'm really not just going with the flow.
And this national service announcement and follow up is hands down the worst political move I've seen in years. I did not think the Tories might be at existential risk before, whereas now I think it is the most probable option.
a) No same Government would even let that happen; so
b) In the “pigs might fly” scenario that the Tories actually won, we have to conclude there will be other, probably quite racists and damaging, restrictions on immigrants.
I actively want this government to lose, I just think facts matter, and it should lose for things that are true. It has many sins in its record.
47ish% of people under the age of 24 voted, whereas 74% of pensioners voted in 2019.
I cannot think of a policy better placed to get young people off their arses and voting than "vote Labour or it's national service".
There is a huge untapped pool of Labour voters if that 47% can even be brought up to, say, 55%.
Yesterday The FT described 2024 as "the first post TV election" and I really do think a targeted social media campaign aimed at getting out the youth vote could have real cut through this time. "Get off your arses and register, or it's conscription/the gulag for you," fronted by some tiktok influencer nobody over the age of 30 has even heard of but inexplicably has 20 million followers.
Huge opportunity for Labour here. If any policy will get young people off their arses and voting, it's this.
I mean, it's novel I'll give them that
Now I won’t stretch than analogy too far. The Tories aren’t going to win. But I also don’t think they are trying to particularly. If your max target is 35% and you’d be happy at 32%, this site isn’t where your voters live.
Far too many of you have forgotten what something like the 2001 Tory campaign looked like.
Granted it is a Sunday, and many are deeply despondent about their chances anyway, but I can't see discipline being maintained in this campaign to remain on message.
Yes, it's just as shit as you are imagining
The real point to skewer them with is that they haven’t thought through the policy because they know they won’t win.
Your initial post doesn't even make any sense on its own terms since it seems to suggest you disagree with the view of twitter - which is indeed generally a good strategy - but you would be doing so without 'evidence', whatever that might be in this context. Why aren't you waiting for evidence before declaring you look forward to taking other people's money, presumably as they will be wrong?
No, I throw out my immediate thoughts on events, and then if I am proven wrong I get egg on my face and have to put my hand up and own being a fool.
But being proven wrong later doesn't bother me, so I just respond honestly - usually I am much more equivocal, but this stuff looks like a disaster. If this is what 2001 was like then it must have been a wild and depressing ride for Tories.
By the end of the campaign I fully expect to have a Leon-esque range of predictions I have made.
What I am shouting at the sky about is the pathetic, infantile level of debate centred on half truths and lies. People should debate the actual issues and real facts on the ground. But no one wants to. They want to play their silly Twitter games. They want “their side” to win and that’s it.
To be honest, the Labour line on this is better than all this Twitter crap - it’s desperate ill-thought through rubbish.
There is a serious underlying debate though, which is about a proper modern form of national service, modelled after the Scandis, which we will end up doing anyway so we all ought to discuss the pros and cons. But we won’t. There will be silly Twitter jokes now, and then it will just happen three years down the line, and no one will ever have actually debated it.
It is why Biden is in trouble. $15 for McDs.
You can stick all your CPI / RPI falling to 2% where the sun doesn't shine, when people go to the pub, for a takeaway, an ice cream and the prices are twice what they were used to paying, it hits hard even if you can afford it.
Lost @anabobzina's vote.
Bet he can hear me.
"At the top of the list are Canada (83%), Japan (83%) and Great Britain (82%). Germany, France and Taiwan are all just a notch below, viewed favorably by between 77% and 79%.
Large majorities of Americans also view South Korea, India, Ukraine, Israel, Egypt and Mexico favorably."
source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/612170/americans-china-nation-top-foe-russia-second.aspx
(In the past, Australia sometimes came in first, in similar rankings.)
And why anguished articles about £ 2k+ per month school fees have the opposite effect.
It does all the same virtue signally, about giving back is good, mixing with people you might never normally meet is good. Sunak could do the whole when I was at school I did this, it was very rewarding.
It won't get the kids vote, but the oldies will more likely decent bloke, that seems ok.
They'd just love some unpaid busywork on top of their everyday bollocks.
I expect to see a small bounce in the polls by the end of the week.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1832_United_Kingdom_general_election
And for most is us - a pint, an ice-cream, a maccy dees - was the little treat that got us through the day.
And that’s true even up the income scale.
I paid $50 for a negroni and a G&T at a bar on the Upper East Side last week. Admittedly a “first world problem”, but I actually can’t afford to do this in the way I once did.
That's before we get to the inflation, interest rates, Brexit, and awful campaign.
At gathering of locals at neighborhood coffee shop, even those believing national service is a concept worth considering (including me) found the unpaid nature of compulsory "volunteer" service off-putting, to put it mildly.
Ideally, true national service should be a school for the youth of the nation, and aiding to the present and future welfare of the nation. Including providing some income - not munificent but reasonable - for said youths AND in many cases their families.
Sorta like the CCC (Civilian Conservation Corps) and similar programs established under FDR during the New Deal. America is still littered, but in a good way, with testimonials to work they did and things they built in thousands of communities from Sea to Shining Sea.
BTW In Durham (I'm as far south as Doncaster today which is the other thing - this isn't southern PH prices) there is an astonishingly good (absolutely Michelin star quality) restaurant that will give you a six course tasting menu for £55/head - and the wine for roughly another £30: https://www.coarse.restaurant/6-course-tasting-menu-restaurant-durham
There's something else very odd going on here and I assume it's rent seeking somewhere.
1) Everyone my age assumes that Labour will get in
2) Everyone hates the Tories anyway. Diminishing marginal returns
HOWEVER
Millennials are not swinging right like earlier generations, even as they come into prime voting age . This is basically due to tuition fees and housing tenure - despite all the chat about housebuilding, it's actually the proportions of rent:mortgage:outright that has screwed the Tories.
Now they are just starting the process of alienating GenZ with stuff like National Service. That just serves to extend the wilderness period. At some point, they need to accept that the Boomers will die during the 2030s and that's it for their votes.
The raw ingredients for high end restaurants isn't that much higher, the value add is the skill of the chefs. There is only so much more things like wild mushroom costs, even if they were harvested by wild boars.
https://www.facebook.com/theliverpoolecho/posts/pfbid031mNdAXJZMW3ZjzSt99NbALMfrAfwTRDXXSg5EsssJqpaE3gDN4C6onGdrZqAq1uKl
The Tories also now lead less with pensioners than they did, in France and Canada left Liberals Macron and Trudeau actually poll better with pensioners than the young
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/rishi-sunak-general-election-campaign-b2551413.html
On other hand, it speaks ill of Rishi Sunak's seeming inability to get any boost let alone traction from his historic status; unlike Margaret Thatcher who clearly DID get a bump from being the first woman PM, all while NOT dwelling on it herself - just doing it.
Part and parcel of his under-performance as a politico, in No. 10 or on the campaign trail.
Re: the first point, think the same is true of conservative Republicans who are willing and able to vote for and actually elect fellow conservatives who are People of Color (as well say in the USA) as Governors, Senators and even Presidents & Vice Presidents.
My own observation, is that, at least in US, voters do NOT object to minority-group candidates who sometimes talk about their heritage and ethnicity, religion, national origin, and occasionally act upon it. For example, when Nikki Haley ordered the lowering of the Confederate flag in South Carolina and Tim Scott strongly supported this. Local and national conservatives, including Trump supporters, mostly also supported or at least went along.
As for White progressives & liberals, they are very open to electing minority candidates, indeed many would prefer to vote for a Black, Asian, Native American, Muslim, etc. candidate if that's a resonable option; indeed, can be a big help in a crowded field and/or tight race.
I am not sure the other non-white ones that are rising to the top by default are anywhere near as high quality, which might get that negative perceptive loop.
It IS cheaper to eat out if you do it outside major metro areas of America. Though it's still getting more expensive, especially when you factor in factors such as USers driving farther on average for a non-home cooked meal that UKers.
(While I'm unnecessarily telling irrelevant personal travel anecdotes - a service I'm providing as the usual lushes don't seem to be around this evening - the only reason the situation arose at all is cause the spa suites at the hotel Mrs Dumbosaurus and I are staying at don't accept under 18s, as I found out a couple of days ago when I called up to ask for a cot. Essentially they're just suites with a jacuzzi and sauna in so I can only assume either teenagers have been trashing the place or someone baked a toddler; doesn't make sense. Anwyays so I've had to sweet talk Mother Dumbosaurus into coming down as well in a nearby hotel to look after Baby Dumbosaurus for the night. And her Premier Inn cost me less than the PIzza Hut even at that late notice. Things just don't make sense.)
Osborne was genuinely hated for many years, but conversely people didn't really doubt he could do the job (yes we know pasty tax, but in general). He was the classic villainous Tory cutting benefits, portrayed as ruthlessly doing his job with a twinkle in his eye taking away money from the poor / disabled while eating his fancy burger.
Having said that not much chance of India electing a white PM anytime soon either
However, one thing I have heard a lot from friends and acquaintances under 30 has been "there's nothing between Labour and Conservative any more, I'm voting green". The Conservatives putting clear water between themselves and Labour by going full Captain Mainwaring may drive some of those voters back to Labour.
Maybe I'm wrong and this is a genius core vote strategy that will see Reform voters flocking back to the Tories. But I think it will repel as many voters as it appeals to, and will drive yet more don't knows and Greens over to Labour.
The other thing it does is closes the Conservative Party to anyone with a remotely libertarian leaning. There was a time when social conservatives and libertarians could just about rub shoulders in the same party. There are plenty of posters here who fit into the "socially liberal but economically dry" category who were once natural Conservative voters who are now repelled by the lurch to hard right authoritarian "populism".
Would also mention the Horace Greeley for President campaign in 1868 versus U.S. Grant.
""Why I Fear the Future
Konstantin Kisin"
https://www.konstantinkisin.com/p/why-i-fear-the-future
As such, you have large Reform votes in some Labour:Tory marginals. I'd guesstimate that a Reform > Tory switcher is 2x or 3x as important as a Green > Labour one.
This says nothing about turnout though.