Howdy, Stranger!

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

One week on and betting markets remain utterly convinced about Starmer winning a majority

245678

Comments

  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,581

    On LBC, former Theresa May SPAD Tom Swarbrick, is very perplexed by Labour's stance on Diane Abbott. NEC's Mish Ramen calls the entitled white Starmer Labour leadership racist because of the Party's treatment of PB Tory favourite Diane Abbott.

    Sixteen unions demand PB Tory favourite Diane Abbott is reinstated.

    Could PB Tory favourite Diane Abbott can deliver a Tory victory?

    No, but so far at least Keir has fumbled this.
    Abbott should be free to stand, indeed hasn’t he implied as much?

    This is essentially trivia, save what it tells us about Keir’s judgement (so far, not great).
    If Starmer lets Mrs Entitled -Bonkers stand, he really does have poor judgement.

    It is confected nonsense by the media, but it has definitely derailed Starmer. Good on the BBC, good on Victoria Derbyshire.
    It has “derailed” Starmer.

    Whatever you say.

    FFS, give it a rest. Your desperation is embarrassing.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,957
    TOPPING said:

    89% is high but I continue to wonder why we on PB, who fight like cats in a sack about every nuance of possible political outcome, take "the betting markets" as somehow better informed.

    We are the betting market, surely? :D
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And there is, as yet, no trend
  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,478

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And there is, as yet, no trend
    Stability is in itself a trend.
    Touchè
  • eekeek Posts: 28,433

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And the trend at the moment is Labour 45% or higher
    Tories 26% or lower

    And the Tory party is at the point that seats start to disintegrate 26% gives the Toris 108 seats, 25% 96, 24% 84, 23% 49..
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,744

    Diane Abbott anecdote:

    Wor Lass once spotted Ms Abbott in the cafe at John Lewis in Sloane Square, and went over to say hello to her. The response was anything but warm and friendly.

    Peter Jones

  • eekeek Posts: 28,433

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And there is, as yet, no trend
    Stability is in itself a trend.
    Stability is what I expect, the other option is swingback and that didn't occur in 1997 so why would it occur now when the Tories are in a worse state then they were then..
  • eekeek Posts: 28,433
    edited May 29
    geoffw said:

    Diane Abbott anecdote:

    Wor Lass once spotted Ms Abbott in the cafe at John Lewis in Sloane Square, and went over to say hello to her. The response was anything but warm and friendly.

    Peter Jones

    delete - twas wrong. it's still Peter Jones..
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,753

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    eek said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And the trend at the moment is Labour 45% or higher
    Tories 26% or lower

    And the Tory party is at the point that seats start to disintegrate 26% gives the Toris 108 seats, 25% 96, 24% 84, 23% 49..
    If Ian Dale chooses wisely he could be leader by the end of July
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,209

    There are times when I think we on PB need to get out more. In the real world, most people don't know who Diane Abbott and most of those who do, don't care whether she stands or not. The thought that this is going to change the narrative of the election is simply fantasy.

    Agreed… although it could increase the vote for Corbyn in Islington N.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,433
    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    yep - because the margin of error is 2% so it's perfectly possible the old figure was out by 2% and the new one out 1% in the other direction...

    Trend is the thing here...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,258
    DM_Andy said:

    kamski said:

    After the fall of communism, a friend of mine discovered he was a minor celebrity in Romania. He'd written a book in French about some New Age nonsense which had sold a handful of copies. But the samizdat publishers had translated it into Romanian, it being easier to translate from other Romance languages. And for some reason it was very popular in Romania so lots of copies were distributed.

    He had no idea about this until he got an invitation to visit Romania in 1990.

    It's not Moldova, but it's the closest I've got.

    Sounds a bit like Sixto Rodriguez, released a couple of albums in Detroit in the early 1970s, wasn't a success and drifted out of the business only to find out in 1997 that he had sold loads in South Africa and was a bona fide star. The documentary "Searching for Sugar Man" about his story is well worth the watch.
    Yep, it's an amazing movie.

    There's this guy, whose albums didn't sell, and who went back and spent his life working in construction. And then - aged about 60 - he finds himself a star, playing sold out stadium gigs in South Africa.

    Worth listening to both his albums.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 22,171
    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,646
    edited May 29
    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,915

    There are times when I think we on PB need to get out more. In the real world, most people don't know who Diane Abbott and most of those who do, don't care whether she stands or not. The thought that this is going to change the narrative of the election is simply fantasy.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/public_figure/Diane_Abbott

    Most people do know who she is. Youguv have recognition at 76%, but popularity at just 11% and disliked by 49%. It is obviously better for Labour if she does not stand.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,433
    Selebian said:

    eek said:
    Reverse Truss! One to watch for the Lib Dem leadership in a few years, after which there will be no more Lib Dems :hushed:
    Which brings us to the end of year question - which one of Bozo, Truss or Rishi destroyed the tory party?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    eek said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And there is, as yet, no trend
    Stability is in itself a trend.
    Stability is what I expect, the other option is swingback and that didn't occur in 1997 so why would it occur now when the Tories are in a worse state then they were then..
    There was a closing of the gap from low to mid 20s to mid to high teens over the course of the 97 campaign (very broadly speaking) so a limited swingback occured
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127
    AlsoLei said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
    I would take 4) but if Abbott's disciplinary process ended in December then I can't see how it can be true, it would have been sorted out by now. Let me propose 5) Starmer's team has proposed something that they genuinely thought was fair but Abbott genuinely thought was too humiliating to accept. The Frank Hester thing happened and Abbott thought Starmer might soften which would explain the House of Commons exchange after that PMQ session and the whole thing has got messy. Still means that Starmer lied through his teeth last week but at least gives him a goodish motive for doing so.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809

    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
    Of corse MOE works in both directions. A Lab score of 50% is within MOE in that poll
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,300
    edited May 29

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    JLP, Opinium and Savanta have all consistently had rather smaller (but still very healthy) Labour leads compared to the others. As yesterdays thread header explained this is due to the way these pollsters deal with "don't knows" compared to the others.

    Reminds me quite a lot of 1997 when ICM stood alone as the only pollster with somewhat more modest Labour leads compared to the rest of the pack. In that election ICM was proved correct as Labour *ONLY* won with a 13% lead as opposed to the +20% lead most of the other pollsters were showing at the time.

    Of course we won't know until 10pm on 4th July whether JLP, Opinium and Savanta have this right and Labour win with a landslide and the Tories are out of power for a decade or whether YouGov, People Polling, etc are correct and Labour wins with the biggest majority in British history and the Conservative Party is destroyed forever.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061

    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
    And 44 was lower end recently for YouGov so it's absolutely in line with their long term trend for Lab VI
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127
    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
    I don't agree with her, but if someone had made jokes about raping me I wouldn't like them being platformed either.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,753

    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
    Well, treat those two figures as independent samples, and tell me how many standard deviations you think the difference represents.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,646
    DM_Andy said:

    AlsoLei said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
    I would take 4) but if Abbott's disciplinary process ended in December then I can't see how it can be true, it would have been sorted out by now. Let me propose 5) Starmer's team has proposed something that they genuinely thought was fair but Abbott genuinely thought was too humiliating to accept. The Frank Hester thing happened and Abbott thought Starmer might soften which would explain the House of Commons exchange after that PMQ session and the whole thing has got messy. Still means that Starmer lied through his teeth last week but at least gives him a goodish motive for doing so.
    They can’t keep her out of the party without a legal fight they’ll almost certainly lose, but also don’t want her campaigning for Corbyn the independent. That’s the naked politics, and it’s visible from space, which is why it backfired on Starmer.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,433
    edited May 29
    GIN1138 said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    JLP, Opinium and Savanta have all consistently had rather smaller (but still very healthy) Labour leads compared to the others. As yesterdays thread header explained this is due to the way these pollsters deal with "don't knows" compared to the others.

    Reminds me quite a lot of 1997 when ICM stood alone as the only pollster with somewhat more modest Labour leads compared to the rest of the pack. In that election ICM was proved correct as Labour *ONLY* won with a 13% lead as opposed to the +20% lead most of the other pollsters were showing at the time.

    Of course we won't know until 10pm on 4th July whether JLP, Opinium and Savanta have this right and Labour win with a landslide and the Tories are out of power for a decade or whether YouGov, People Polling, etc are correct and Labour wins with the biggest majority in British history and the Conservative Party is destroyed forever.
    I looked at the assumptions that JLP made today and I don't think their assumptions stack up.

    For instance the idea is that Tory inclined Don't knows will vote yet Labour ones won't which doesn't match the anti-Tory feeling I'm seeing elsewhere - I feel the opposite may well be true, and that is what the nowcast forecasts are all continually saying.

    It's early days though - I suspect it won't be until a week after the manifestos appear that we know the real state of play - it wouldn't surprise me to see Labour on 48% with the Tories on 24% though..
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,801
    edited May 29

    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
    With statistically lower probability of being the same, though.

    The MoE is (I assume) the 95%CI on the estimate based on sample size. You can have statistically different values with overlapping CIs.

    Depends on the assumed distribution and a 3pp difference may well not be statistically different, but it's not impossible. Of course, these are rounded % anyway, so we don't know the exact difference in point estimates - could be up to 4pp with the rounding (43.5 plays 47.4999999999...)

    ETA: But who cares anyway? The Tories are polling ~20pp behind and the headline is that isn't noticeably shrinking!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,809
    DM_Andy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
    I don't agree with her, but if someone had made jokes about raping me I wouldn't like them being platformed either.
    That Truss has such poor judgement and self respect to appear on his programme is not very surprising.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,744

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And there is, as yet, no trend
    Stability is in itself a trend.
    Touchè
    Accent aigu s'il vous plait

  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,478
    DM_Andy said:

    AlsoLei said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
    I would take 4) but if Abbott's disciplinary process ended in December then I can't see how it can be true, it would have been sorted out by now. Let me propose 5) Starmer's team has proposed something that they genuinely thought was fair but Abbott genuinely thought was too humiliating to accept. The Frank Hester thing happened and Abbott thought Starmer might soften which would explain the House of Commons exchange after that PMQ session and the whole thing has got messy. Still means that Starmer lied through his teeth last week but at least gives him a goodish motive for doing so.
    That also sounds reasonable - one of those situations were the two sides have completely misread each others positions.

    In that case, the party's best bet is to roll over - it'll be her last election in any case. But if she is, for example, insisting on being able to support Corbyn, I can see why they're resisting.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,293
    Curious thing is that the nowcasters and the forecasters really ought to converge by polling day, but there's not much sign of that happening yet
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914

    On LBC, former Theresa May SPAD Tom Swarbrick, is very perplexed by Labour's stance on Diane Abbott. NEC's Mish Ramen calls the entitled white Starmer Labour leadership racist because of the Party's treatment of PB Tory favourite Diane Abbott.

    Sixteen unions demand PB Tory favourite Diane Abbott is reinstated.

    Could PB Tory favourite Diane Abbott can deliver a Tory victory?

    No, but so far at least Keir has fumbled this.
    Abbott should be free to stand, indeed hasn’t he implied as much?

    This is essentially trivia, save what it tells us about Keir’s judgement (so far, not great).
    If Starmer lets Mrs Entitled -Bonkers stand, he really does have poor judgement.

    It is confected nonsense by the media, but it has definitely derailed Starmer. Good on the BBC, good on Victoria Derbyshire.
    It offends peoples idea of natural justice. Nothing confected about it. On the wider point it doesn't help Labour if their tent is just made up of Srarmer clones.

    ............but beyond that there's something iconic about the first female black MP and Labour's heritage means a lot to plenty of people.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 22,171
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
    Well, treat those two figures as independent samples, and tell me how many standard deviations you think the difference represents.
    That's not how statistics work.

    Treating them as independent samples, they each have a range of results they can be within standard deviation MoE - and those ranges overlap meaning they are within MoE of each other.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,646
    DM_Andy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
    I don't agree with her, but if someone had made jokes about raping me I wouldn't like them being platformed either.
    Even if the quote is both correct and recent (and 2024 Carl is a very different man from 2018 Sargon), then the joke is really not about rape, it’s about her being unattractive to him.

    Philips comes across as someone who’d happily shut down Roast Battle night at the Comedy Store.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,209
    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
    Do you think Truss should pal round with a conspiracy theorist who’s also bezzies with Tommy Robinson? Freedom of speech, sure, Truss can go talk to whoever she wants, but equally the Conservative Party could say that they don’t want her as a candidate if she thinks that’s appropriate.
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189
    This is suboptimal. Although not sure this isn’t something that couldnt accidentally happen to a Labour candidate but it’s really not the best thing to get yourself pictured with a convicted drug dealer.

    https://x.com/lbc/status/1795834420680687806?s=46
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,494
    RobD said:

    We back?

    Front too...
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,913
    eek said:

    Selebian said:

    eek said:
    Reverse Truss! One to watch for the Lib Dem leadership in a few years, after which there will be no more Lib Dems :hushed:
    Which brings us to the end of year question - which one of Bozo, Truss or Rishi destroyed the tory party?
    Yes
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,753

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
    Well, treat those two figures as independent samples, and tell me how many standard deviations you think the difference represents.
    That's not how statistics work.

    Treating them as independent samples, they each have a range of results they can be within standard deviation MoE - and those ranges overlap meaning they are within MoE of each other.
    You are incapable of calculating whether the difference between two independent samples is significant, and you are trying to tell me how statistics work?

    God save us from opinionated Internet numbskulls!
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Guido with the latest p0rn news, lol
    He's so greasy and low rent
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,661
    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.

    It seems pretty reasonable to me that Jess Phillips should have strong opinions about a senior politician who hangs out with someone who has repeatedly talked about raping her.

  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,209
    Sandpit said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
    I don't agree with her, but if someone had made jokes about raping me I wouldn't like them being platformed either.
    Even if the quote is both correct and recent (and 2024 Carl is a very different man from 2018 Sargon), then the joke is really not about rape, it’s about her being unattractive to him.

    Philips comes across as someone who’d happily shut down Roast Battle night at the Comedy Store.
    The quote is correct and it’s very explicitly about raping her. It wasn’t a comedy roast. It was in the context of rape threats being made.

    And he’s said worse things since!
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,801

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
    Do you think Truss should pal round with a conspiracy theorist who’s also bezzies with Tommy Robinson? Freedom of speech, sure, Truss can go talk to whoever she wants, but equally the Conservative Party could say that they don’t want her as a candidate if she thinks that’s appropriate.
    Yes. I don't see the problem in any of this:
    • Truss can do what she wants as far as this is concerned - freedom of speech.
    • Philips can criticise her and call for her to be sacked - freedom of speech
    • Sunak can sack (remove whip from) Truss if he believes her free speech has brought the party into disrepute etc; the voters in her constituency can sack her too
    • Starmer can similarly sack Philips and her voters can too
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    carnforth said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    If the Tories really want a Trump-style moniker for Starmer, "Shifty Starmer" is a hell of lot better than "Sleepy Starmer".
    I have not seen that side of him before today
    Ask Rosie Duffield

    “We’ve been in touch”

    “What? By telepathy?”
  • megasaurmegasaur Posts: 586
    geoffw said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And there is, as yet, no trend
    Stability is in itself a trend.
    Touchè
    Accent aigu s'il vous plait

    plaît
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,189

    Guido with the latest p0rn news, lol
    He's so greasy and low rent

    It’s also bad form to attack someone through their family.
  • megasaurmegasaur Posts: 586
    RobD said:

    We back?

    Or lay.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,801
    RobD said:

    We back?

    We never went. It was Vanilla that left us :cry:
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Tory omnishambles

    SNP “hold my beer”

    bonkers! the SNP successfully amends the motion on Michael Matheson then doesn’t vote for it. what a mess Swinney has made of the straightforward case of a fella caught rinsing his expenses then lying about it.

    https://x.com/euanmccolm/status/1795828176205299760
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    ToryJim said:

    Guido with the latest p0rn news, lol
    He's so greasy and low rent

    It’s also bad form to attack someone through their family.
    I agree. Shady.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,951
    eek said:
    Surely a Young Conservative now is anyone under the age of 65?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,949

    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
    That’s debatable. Spot results have their own margin of error, plus or minus, which people forget usually means 95% confidence limits rather than certainty. Changes from one poll to the next also have their 95% confidence limits, and strictly it isn’t as simple as doubling the margin of error. If the spot margin of error is +/- 3%, with 95% confidence, the chance of a 6% movement between one poll and the next, with no change in methodology, is nevertheless less than 5%.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,661
    Sandpit said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
    I don't agree with her, but if someone had made jokes about raping me I wouldn't like them being platformed either.
    Even if the quote is both correct and recent (and 2024 Carl is a very different man from 2018 Sargon), then the joke is really not about rape, it’s about her being unattractive to him.

    Philips comes across as someone who’d happily shut down Roast Battle night at the Comedy Store.

    Yeah, right:

    https://www.chronicle.gi/police-investigate-ukip-candidate-jess-phillips-rape-comments/


  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,832

    carnforth said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    If the Tories really want a Trump-style moniker for Starmer, "Shifty Starmer" is a hell of lot better than "Sleepy Starmer".
    I have not seen that side of him before today
    Ask Rosie Duffield

    “We’ve been in touch”

    “What? By telepathy?”
    "My people have been in touch with her people."

    "She doesn't have people..."
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,914
    ToryJim said:

    Guido with the latest p0rn news, lol
    He's so greasy and low rent

    It’s also bad form to attack someone through their family.
    Is that an attack on his family?
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,801
    megasaur said:

    geoffw said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    Movement within the MoE is not movement (either way), its noise
    However virtually all movement does occur within MoE. Something like 99% of all polls move within MoE, even when changes are happening.

    A 10 point swing between the parties can still be within MoE.

    Need to look at the trend rather than just individual polls to separate out the noise.
    And there is, as yet, no trend
    Stability is in itself a trend.
    Touchè
    Accent aigu s'il vous plait

    plaît
    pédant :wink:
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,258

    kle4 said:

    Trump jury is getting their instructions from the judge - on reasonable doubt, no negative inference from defendant not testifying etc - I have to admit this one is not one I had considered, but I suppose everyone does draw inferences so you need to give some guidance.

    Merchan just gave jurors the boilerplate instruction — given in many state and federal courts — about their power to draw inferences. The classic example: If you go to bed and the ground outside is dry, and you wake up and the ground outside is wet, you can infer that it rained overnight.

    Prosceutors have asked the jury to draw some inferences about Trump's micromanaging nature to conclude that he certainly would have been aware of the specifics of Michael Cohen's efforts to pay off Stormy Daniels.

    That great legal tradition of I reckon
    They could also of course infer that as Cohen is a convicted liar that he cannot be trusted, its double edged
    Convicted, of course, of lying on behalf of his boss.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    Sandpit said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.
    I don't agree with her, but if someone had made jokes about raping me I wouldn't like them being platformed either.
    Even if the quote is both correct and recent (and 2024 Carl is a very different man from 2018 Sargon), then the joke is really not about rape, it’s about her being unattractive to him.

    Philips comes across as someone who’d happily shut down Roast Battle night at the Comedy Store.
    The quote is correct and it’s very explicitly about raping her. It wasn’t a comedy roast. It was in the context of rape threats being made.

    And he’s said worse things since!
    He’s a nasty piece of work and I can’t really fathom defending or endorsing him.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,225
    TOPPING said:

    89% is high but I continue to wonder why we on PB, who fight like cats in a sack about every nuance of possible political outcome, take "the betting markets" as somehow better informed.

    Betting markets don't know jack.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,225

    ABBOTT

    And Costello?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,581
    edited May 29

    Chris said:

    New @Moreincommon_ voting intention, 27-29 May
    Margin of error changes see Labour's lead at 19
    🔵Conservative 26 (-1)
    🔴Labour 45 (+1)
    🟡Liberal Democrat 9 (-)
    🟢Green 5 (-1)
    🟣Reform UK 11 (+1)
    Changes with 22-23 May n = 2008

    The JLP poll looks increasingly like an outlier. MiC is the fourth in a row that has edged away from the Tories, whilst JLP has gone the other way.
    It’s all just tiny MOE stuff.
    Are you saying that the YouGov movement for Labour from 44% to 47%, with a sample size of 2128, is within margin of error?
    Of course it is!

    You do realise that MoE being ± means that double the MoE movement is still within MoE, don't you?
    I’m not sure he does!
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,670

    HYUFD said:

    Hard to see how Starmer doesn't win a majority, main question is its size. Even if somehow the Tories prevented Labour winning a majority in England, Labour gains from the SNP in Scotland and the Labour majority in Wales would give Labour most seats UK wide

    Even in the unlikely event of the Tories getting most seats (say 300), the other parties would line up to boot Sunak out of Downing Street.
    While it now looks unlikely there is tremendous room for a chaotic result - the sort where the Tories have loads but not enough seats (321/322 might be the watershed because of SF) and, of course, no friends to hold their hands, while everyone else doesn't either. Tories 312, all others 337 + Speaker....
  • eekeek Posts: 28,433

    Curious thing is that the nowcasters and the forecasters really ought to converge by polling day, but there's not much sign of that happening yet

    Forecasters make assumptions to convert a nowcast into their forecast.

    What happens if their assumptions are just outright invalid this time round I looked at the JLP assumptions and can give counter arguments for most of them, if that's true for JLP it's equally true for everyone else.

    And remember the only difference between the nowcasters and the forecasters is that the nowcasters are expecting the collapse of the tory party, the forecasters are expecting a result that makes the 97 landslide look small.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,957
    ToryJim said:

    Guido with the latest p0rn news, lol
    He's so greasy and low rent

    It’s also bad form to attack someone through their family.
    Agreed entirely.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,581
    All of the polls out in the last few days have been well within the MOE of their previous survey.
  • StaffordKnotStaffordKnot Posts: 99

    There are times when I think we on PB need to get out more. In the real world, most people don't know who Diane Abbott and most of those who do, don't care whether she stands or not. The thought that this is going to change the narrative of the election is simply fantasy.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/public_figure/Diane_Abbott

    Most people do know who she is. Youguv have recognition at 76%, but popularity at just 11% and disliked by 49%. It is obviously better for Labour if she does not stand.
    Two points:

    They define Fame as “…the % of people who have heard of this topic.” That’s not the same as knowing who she is. Secondly, I think we need to question the respondent base. According to the table 24% know Gloria Del Piero. I’m a politics nerd and I had never heard of her!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,225
    Sandpit said:

    DM_Andy said:

    AlsoLei said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
    I would take 4) but if Abbott's disciplinary process ended in December then I can't see how it can be true, it would have been sorted out by now. Let me propose 5) Starmer's team has proposed something that they genuinely thought was fair but Abbott genuinely thought was too humiliating to accept. The Frank Hester thing happened and Abbott thought Starmer might soften which would explain the House of Commons exchange after that PMQ session and the whole thing has got messy. Still means that Starmer lied through his teeth last week but at least gives him a goodish motive for doing so.
    They can’t keep her out of the party without a legal fight they’ll almost certainly lose, but also don’t want her campaigning for Corbyn the independent. That’s the naked politics, and it’s visible from space, which is why it backfired on Starmer.
    Letting her stand and then suspending her if she campaigns for Corbyn seems simplest. No challenge there, you can't back someone running against the party.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,258

    This is some job change

    Vincent Kompany goes from relegated Burnley to Bayern Munich head coach

    Quite:

    "Failed at Burnley, went to Bayern" is not something you expect to see.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 22,171

    So what if Angela Rayner’s son is a porn star? He makes porn with his wife. Who cares? These curtain-twitchers need to get an effing life.

    I couldn't care less if he made porn with strangers on the internet. What consenting adults do is up to them.

    The only reason I'd be bothered is if he was making it with children - and even then it would be nothing to do with Angela.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,293
    eek said:

    Curious thing is that the nowcasters and the forecasters really ought to converge by polling day, but there's not much sign of that happening yet

    Forecasters make assumptions to convert a nowcast into their forecast.

    What happens if their assumptions are just outright invalid this time round I looked at the JLP assumptions and can give counter arguments for most of them, if that's true for JLP it's equally true for everyone else.

    And remember the only difference between the nowcasters and the forecasters is that the nowcasters are expecting the collapse of the tory party, the forecasters are expecting a result that makes the 97 landslide look small.
    Yup. The closer that 'now' and 'election day' get, the less time there is for swingback to swing. Normally that ought to happen. Heck, Major got some swingback. But it isn't, and- like you say- maybe the dynamics of Con/Ref are going to prevent it happening.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,225

    So what if Angela Rayner’s son is a porn star? He makes porn with his wife. Who cares? These curtain-twitchers need to get an effing life.

    The curtain twitcher party might do very well in an election.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Will Gething make it past 1.75 Trusses??
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127
    AlsoLei said:

    DM_Andy said:

    AlsoLei said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
    I would take 4) but if Abbott's disciplinary process ended in December then I can't see how it can be true, it would have been sorted out by now. Let me propose 5) Starmer's team has proposed something that they genuinely thought was fair but Abbott genuinely thought was too humiliating to accept. The Frank Hester thing happened and Abbott thought Starmer might soften which would explain the House of Commons exchange after that PMQ session and the whole thing has got messy. Still means that Starmer lied through his teeth last week but at least gives him a goodish motive for doing so.
    That also sounds reasonable - one of those situations were the two sides have completely misread each others positions.

    In that case, the party's best bet is to roll over - it'll be her last election in any case. But if she is, for example, insisting on being able to support Corbyn, I can see why they're resisting.
    Where's the dividing line between supporting Corbyn and not supporting Corbyn. I believe the issue of contention was Laura Alvarez and her tweet on Sunday
    "Happy birthday to my favourite person and the real leader of the people. Let's celebrate his birthday by getting everyone to #VoteCorbyn
    Sign up http://Votecorbyn.com I ❤️ Jeremy Corbyn t-shirt."
    Abbott is reported to have liked the tweet, was that a like of wishing her close friend and colleague over a number of years a happy birthday or a like of his campaign to win Islington North?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,755
    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    DM_Andy said:

    AlsoLei said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
    I would take 4) but if Abbott's disciplinary process ended in December then I can't see how it can be true, it would have been sorted out by now. Let me propose 5) Starmer's team has proposed something that they genuinely thought was fair but Abbott genuinely thought was too humiliating to accept. The Frank Hester thing happened and Abbott thought Starmer might soften which would explain the House of Commons exchange after that PMQ session and the whole thing has got messy. Still means that Starmer lied through his teeth last week but at least gives him a goodish motive for doing so.
    They can’t keep her out of the party without a legal fight they’ll almost certainly lose, but also don’t want her campaigning for Corbyn the independent. That’s the naked politics, and it’s visible from space, which is why it backfired on Starmer.
    Letting her stand and then suspending her if she campaigns for Corbyn seems simplest. No challenge there, you can't back someone running against the party.
    It will emerge too late for the GE though, then Labour are in an Azhar Ali Rochdale position.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,915

    So what if Angela Rayner’s son is a porn star? He makes porn with his wife. Who cares? These curtain-twitchers need to get an effing life.

    Was Rayners house ever used for commercial filming purposes? Did she pay business rates? We really could do with spending a few hundred K and taking some senior detectives off the rota for a month to find out.
  • NickyBreakspearNickyBreakspear Posts: 775
    Has this slide deck (published yesterday) by More in Common been discussed?

    https://www.moreincommon.org.uk/media/3rbhqx0m/weekly-webinar-1.pdf

    One interesting slide is a focus on Conservative 2019 female don't knows. Conservative to undecided voters are overwhelmingly female - Whitby Woman.
    72 per cent of those who voted Conservative in 2019 and now don’t know how they will vote are female. This group skews much older than the rest of the population and are likely to own their home. They are also much more small-c conservative than the rest of the country - coming largely from our Backbone Conservative and Loyal National segments - which supports the idea a large number are in fact disgruntled Conservatives.



    Not the usual marginal picture, so may not have much impact?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,930
    One thing to note in my 4 beat combo, Angus and the Perthshire Glens is that one week in we have had a large A3 4 page glossy and a personally addressed letter from our local Tory candidate pointing out its him or the SNP. Some serious money is being chucked at this seat which I wouldn't have thought was a top Tory target. Nothing from any other party including the hard up incumbent.
    Will this make any difference to anyone except the recycling van? Who knows but I thought i would mention it.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,225

    There are times when I think we on PB need to get out more. In the real world, most people don't know who Diane Abbott and most of those who do, don't care whether she stands or not. The thought that this is going to change the narrative of the election is simply fantasy.

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/public_figure/Diane_Abbott

    Most people do know who she is. Youguv have recognition at 76%, but popularity at just 11% and disliked by 49%. It is obviously better for Labour if she does not stand.
    Two points:

    They define Fame as “…the % of people who have heard of this topic.” That’s not the same as knowing who she is. Secondly, I think we need to question the respondent base. According to the table 24% know Gloria Del Piero. I’m a politics nerd and I had never heard of her!
    You should watch more GB News, then you'd know.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,646

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.

    It seems pretty reasonable to me that Jess Phillips should have strong opinions about a senior politician who hangs out with someone who has repeatedly talked about raping her.

    From the quote in the latter, it appears that the gentleman in question was talking about not raping her.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,915
    rcs1000 said:

    This is some job change

    Vincent Kompany goes from relegated Burnley to Bayern Munich head coach

    Quite:

    "Failed at Burnley, went to Bayern" is not something you expect to see.
    Choupo-Moting failed at Stoke, then went to PSG and Bayern winning 5 titles in a row.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,915
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.

    It seems pretty reasonable to me that Jess Phillips should have strong opinions about a senior politician who hangs out with someone who has repeatedly talked about raping her.

    From the quote in the latter, it appears that the gentleman in question was talking about not raping her.
    I read the quotes but struggled to find a genleman involved?
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,581

    So what if Angela Rayner’s son is a porn star? He makes porn with his wife. Who cares? These curtain-twitchers need to get an effing life.

    Was Rayners house ever used for commercial filming purposes? Did she pay business rates? We really could do with spending a few hundred K and taking some senior detectives off the rota for a month to find out.
    😆 Lol!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,183
    Friday 5 July. Annual leave booked.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,225

    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    DM_Andy said:

    AlsoLei said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
    I would take 4) but if Abbott's disciplinary process ended in December then I can't see how it can be true, it would have been sorted out by now. Let me propose 5) Starmer's team has proposed something that they genuinely thought was fair but Abbott genuinely thought was too humiliating to accept. The Frank Hester thing happened and Abbott thought Starmer might soften which would explain the House of Commons exchange after that PMQ session and the whole thing has got messy. Still means that Starmer lied through his teeth last week but at least gives him a goodish motive for doing so.
    They can’t keep her out of the party without a legal fight they’ll almost certainly lose, but also don’t want her campaigning for Corbyn the independent. That’s the naked politics, and it’s visible from space, which is why it backfired on Starmer.
    Letting her stand and then suspending her if she campaigns for Corbyn seems simplest. No challenge there, you can't back someone running against the party.
    It will emerge too late for the GE though, then Labour are in an Azhar Ali Rochdale position.
    Sure, but they expect to win enough overall that it won't matter, and she'll have burnt her bridges permanently.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,433

    Has this slide deck (published yesterday) by More in Common been discussed?

    https://www.moreincommon.org.uk/media/3rbhqx0m/weekly-webinar-1.pdf

    One interesting slide is a focus on Conservative 2019 female don't knows. Conservative to undecided voters are overwhelmingly female - Whitby Woman.
    72 per cent of those who voted Conservative in 2019 and now don’t know how they will vote are female. This group skews much older than the rest of the population and are likely to own their home. They are also much more small-c conservative than the rest of the country - coming largely from our Backbone Conservative and Loyal National segments - which supports the idea a large number are in fact disgruntled Conservatives.



    Not the usual marginal picture, so may not have much impact?

    Depends what election you are thinking about - if this election is a landslide v scale 9 earthquake, the former tory voters in these seats may be the difference between the Tory party as the mainstream right wing party or the dying umbers of the former mainstream party.
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    Jess Phillips calls for Truss to be deselected.

    https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1795744506664689920

    File under "who gives a shit"
    Voters who don’t think someone should lose their job for appearing on a podcast of someone whom others find objectionable. They give a sh!t.

    Jess Philips, the queen of cancel culture, and a great example of the attitude a Labour government will have towards freedom of speech.

    It seems pretty reasonable to me that Jess Phillips should have strong opinions about a senior politician who hangs out with someone who has repeatedly talked about raping her.

    From the quote in the latter, it appears that the gentleman in question was talking about not raping her.
    I'll quote the double down.
    “There’s been an awful lot of talk about whether I would or wouldn’t rape Jess Phillips. I suppose with enough pressure I might cave, but let’s be honest nobody’s got that much beer.”

    And really if anyone's going to be talking about attractiveness, it's not like Carl Benjamin is an Adonis.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,475
    edited May 29
    tlg86 said:

    Friday 5 July. Annual leave booked.

    If you've got a drinking game planned, recommend you confine it to SNP losses or Lib Dem gains.

    We would miss you if you went for Tory and Labour respectively and died of alcohol poisoning.
  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,478
    Sandpit said:

    DM_Andy said:

    AlsoLei said:

    Good afternoon

    Just caught up with the headlines dominanted by Diane Abbott and for the first time I can say Starmer looked very shifty in his response

    It's a tricky position to be in - he's clearly still hoping that a deal can be done, and doesn't want to be the one responsible for it not happening.

    Abbott does seem to be being even more of a loose cannon than usual - she's been bashing the leadership on Twitter a couple of times a week, and now we have the rumours about her being barred from standing which she seems to have been at least partly responsible for starting.

    There are 4 possibilities that I can think of to explain what's happening:

    1) Abbot really is confused or ill, as the anti-Labour media have been hinting at for years. In this case, the party will want to avoid saying so as it'll make them look like shits if they bring it up.
    2) She's acting maliciously in order to punish the leadership. If so, the party can't really say that directly, as their opponents would paint it as bullying.
    3) It's Starmer's team that are acting maliciously. But in that case why are they being so coy about it?
    4) Some junior party official has screwed up and the party's now left trying to fix things somehow whilst Diane is understandably upset.

    I reckon 4) is the most probable explanation for what we're seeing, but that's purely a guess. If you take the BJO position and think Starmer is a shit, then I can certainly see how 3) would seem like the more likely option.
    I would take 4) but if Abbott's disciplinary process ended in December then I can't see how it can be true, it would have been sorted out by now. Let me propose 5) Starmer's team has proposed something that they genuinely thought was fair but Abbott genuinely thought was too humiliating to accept. The Frank Hester thing happened and Abbott thought Starmer might soften which would explain the House of Commons exchange after that PMQ session and the whole thing has got messy. Still means that Starmer lied through his teeth last week but at least gives him a goodish motive for doing so.
    They can’t keep her out of the party without a legal fight they’ll almost certainly lose, but also don’t want her campaigning for Corbyn the independent. That’s the naked politics, and it’s visible from space, which is why it backfired on Starmer.
    The problem is that if the ability to support Corbyn is the actual sticking point, then it devolves to a special case of option 2- that it's Abbott who's acting maliciously.

    If she became the PPC and then campaigned for Corbyn, she would automatically be kicked out of the party. So she'd be left standing as an independent, it would be too late to nominate an official Labour candidate.

    So if that really is the suspicion, then the party are in the right. They'd win in the constituency no matter which of Abbott, Bramble, or Moema stands. Abbott can only win as Labour, or as an Independent with no Labour opponent.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,581
    kle4 said:

    So what if Angela Rayner’s son is a porn star? He makes porn with his wife. Who cares? These curtain-twitchers need to get an effing life.

    The curtain twitcher party might do very well in an election.
    Yes, we saw a lot of them on here during covid. Surprising how many people are obsessed with the lives of others.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,422
    Angela Rayner is brazenly guilty.
    Of being an uppity working class woman who doesn't know her proper place.
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127

    Has this slide deck (published yesterday) by More in Common been discussed?

    https://www.moreincommon.org.uk/media/3rbhqx0m/weekly-webinar-1.pdf

    One interesting slide is a focus on Conservative 2019 female don't knows. Conservative to undecided voters are overwhelmingly female - Whitby Woman.
    72 per cent of those who voted Conservative in 2019 and now don’t know how they will vote are female. This group skews much older than the rest of the population and are likely to own their home. They are also much more small-c conservative than the rest of the country - coming largely from our Backbone Conservative and Loyal National segments - which supports the idea a large number are in fact disgruntled Conservatives.



    Not the usual marginal picture, so may not have much impact?

    Anecdote isn't data but my Mum's in one of those highlighted seats and ticks all the boxes apart from being in her 70s, the Labour candidate canvassed her in a previous election and she thought he was a lovely young chap and voted for him.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,433
    ydoethur said:

    tlg86 said:

    Friday 5 July. Annual leave booked.

    If you've got a drinking game planned, recommend you confine it to SNP losses or Lib Dem gains.

    We would miss you if you went for Tory and Labour respectively and died of alcohol poisoning.
    Tory gains will I think give you a couple of drinks as Scottish seat results came back..
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,475
    Roger said:

    The 1.pm News was wall to wall Starmer's misstep/duplicity/arrogance over Abbott. Unlikely to move the dial but you'd have to have a heart of stone not to be moved.

    She seems genuinely bewildered and upset. I don't feel Starmer is a particularly straight dealer.

    With Blair in '97 you felt instinctively he'd do the right thing. With Starmer I have no such feeling.

    To be honest, that does not say much for your instincts.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited May 29
    I think the Abbott debacle (along with other mis-steps) shows Starmer’s political inexperience.

    We’re about to replace one politically inexperienced technocrat with another. Both men are smart, both sincere in wanting to better the country’s lot, via different routes, both have been in front line politics for less than a decade.

    That’s why I fear he relies too heavily on SPADs, who are “clever”.

    I suspect we’re in for a bumpy ride.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    dixiedean said:

    Angela Rayner is brazenly guilty.
    Of being an uppity working class woman who doesn't know her proper place.

    She probably is that. More importantly she is a fecking hypocrite who cashed in on not one but two council house sales.
This discussion has been closed.