Starmer could really wound Sunak tonight by working an “I agree with Nigel” into one of his answers.
Yeah that would really cheer the Diane Abbott Appreciation Society ( Diane's PB Tory Fanclub obviously excepted).
Although lines like “by the time of the 2nd debate in this campaign, I might be facing Nigel Farage over there” seems punchy, the best thing Starmer should do in this one is just ignore Farage, and just try to pin the cost of living pain, and all the other bits of pain this parliament, on the Conservative Party.
Repeating the question Sunak got from a worker in the audience is probably the best punch of all Starmer can throw - after your VPN and all the lockdown partying, why should the voters ever trust you again?
If the Tories did face an extinction level event taking them below 100 significantly (I think they'll avoid this...just) I wonder if the survivors will become famous figures of legend in years to come. It is not always the case that places which survive such an event represent the true strongholds which will never be lost after all.
One of the facts that always astounds me is that of the 8 seats the LDs retained in 2015, they only hold 2 of them today, both with the same MP
Orkney and Shetland Westmoreland and Lonsdale
In some of the others they are still in contention and will probably win them back (as they have already won back several lost in 2015), but in others despite holding on in 2015 they are falling back and and are not even close for second anymore like Leeds North West.
Let’s be honest, this is the most difficult of elections to poll, especially MRP and seat forecast, is it not? Tories could get anything between 180 and, depending if they struggle to squeeze Reform, struggle with sit on their hands former voters, and/or hit by pin point tactical voting, fall as low as 100. That’s a lot of wide variables.
I’m to think, if Con don’t get much swingback on the polls from here, to finish 9 to 15 behind, that bigger gap more than 10, and evidence tactical LLG votes been so precise in elections this parliament it’s been pushing election results to the worst case of expectations every time for the Conservatives, they can end up on lower end of 100-180 MPs. They really can 😩
Sunak and the people he’s surrounded himself with in decision making, is a far bigger reason for how bad it is at this election, than putting greater blame on Boris and Truss. If you go down to historic and unthinkable low of near to 100 seats, there’s no convincing argument it would have been even worse than that if Boris was leading. A charming rascal always fairs better than a charmless man, as sure as the alpha male always beats the beta… the harder the beta male tries, the more they emit they just haven’t got it. Are we about to see that tonight?
Makes you wonder how many of those historical election results also was decided on the presidential aspect of leader v leader, rather than USP built by their parties?
In all seriousness, if Putin bombing the fuck out of Uke infra means no aircon and no electric fans then JEEZZ
Odessa is HOT and humid in the summer
"In all seriousness..." Unspoofable.
I’m saying that being here in Odessa brings home what a life without reliable mains power is like. Everywhere has portable generators. Aircon is an unrealistic luxury. The internet can go off any moment. Mobile signal itself can end. All electric transactions can become unfeasible at any moment. No lights after 9pm. And so on
The first UK-Elect forecast of this campaign has been published on the UK-Elect website ( www.ukelect.co.uk ). It is based on the national and regional opinion poll averages and shows a Labour majority of "only" 154. (Lab 401, Con 178, LD 31, SNP 16). https://www.ukelect.co.uk/HTML/forecasts/20240604ForecastUK.html
Is this done on UNS? I note your Independent in Devon. Not a criticism - just asking for clarification
I don’t get the kind of thinking that is saying “The Tories will get 150+ seats minimum simply because that is what always happens”
Everything is ‘as it always was’…until it isn’t.
The underlying circumstances are very different this time compared with previous elections.
That doesn’t mean Labour will win 450+ seats by any means, but you can’t simply look at results that ‘feel’ more realistic and claim that they are simply because they are closer to previous seat totals.
Indeed. People may be getting caught up in events and overexcited, most of the time things remain boring and normal after all, but you do get those tipping point moments.
The first UK-Elect forecast of this campaign has been published on the UK-Elect website ( www.ukelect.co.uk ). It is based on the national and regional opinion poll averages and shows a Labour majority of "only" 154. (Lab 401, Con 178, LD 31, SNP 16). https://www.ukelect.co.uk/HTML/forecasts/20240604ForecastUK.html
Plausible, and the Tories would breathe a sigh of relief.
There are a lot of very close seats, however, and it is very easy to slightly adjust the algorithm, (or to perhaps use summed win probabilities rather than first place in each constituency) and "achieve" a Labour majority 20+ greater.
Indeed, I’m sure there’s a lot of uncertainty. The current situation and movements of voters from the last election is probably at the point of maximum potential iterations in terms of seats. All very confusing.
As another poster said earlier, and this is an imperfect comparison, but… Labour got 202 seats in 2019 with 32.1% of the vote.
The Tories are currently polling at around 8% less than that, and have the threat of the LDs in many seats and a resurgent Reform in others, even if you ignore Labour.
Let’s not forget at that election, Reform/BXP stood down in Tory seats, which they aren’t doing now.
Starmer doesn’t scare many Tory voters like Corbyn did, and they have more attractive alternatives.
Really don’t see how they magically get back to 30-35% / 200 seats ish simply because ‘that’s what *should* happen’. It will require substantive things in the campaign to happen if it does at all.
The woman who hurled a milkshake over Nigel Farage as he launched his campaign to become an MP is a Jeremy Corbyn-supporting OnlyFans model who hails from a family of Brexiteers, MailOnline can reveal. Victoria Thomas-Bowen, 25, was arrested by police on suspicion of assault after she drenched the new Reform leader as he stepped out of a Wetherspoons in Clacton, Essex.
In all seriousness, if Putin bombing the fuck out of Uke infra means no aircon and no electric fans then JEEZZ
Odessa is HOT and humid in the summer
"In all seriousness..." Unspoofable.
I’m saying that being here in Odessa brings home what a life without reliable mains power is like. Everywhere has portable generators. Aircon is an unrealistic luxury. The internet can go off any moment. Mobile signal itself can end. All electric transactions can become unfeasible at any moment. No lights after 9pm. And so on
Apply that to your own daily life
We’d miss the debate. Silver linings and all that.
Evening everyone. Certain poll companies are coming out with polls that have the intention of scaring Tory voters to come out and vote for their party. In reality the Tories will end up with 150 to 200 seats. From now to election night we will have to endure being told the party will get 60 to 80 seats etc. This is pure fantasy. No matter how unpopluar they are it will not happen.There may be people on here who believe this is the case or they say on their posts that they agree with these polls. However I doubt anyone is prepared to put their money where their mouth is and lay a bet down on this outcome even if they argue in favour of it on here. Most of us know this is not going to happen. Time will tell and we will soon have the election results thank goddness!
No. The poll companies are not 'coming out with polls that have the intention of scaring Tory voters to come out and vote for their party'.
The polls may prove to be right or they may prove to be wrong but there is no intent to influence voting among any of the polling companies quoted on here.
Has Trafalgar published any UK "polling" yet?
We don't seem to be plagued with rogue or deliberately biased polling companies in the UK fortunately.
Probability summing would be correct over independent "events". But that is not so across constituencies in an election. Moreover the MRP methodology itself implies correlation between constituencies with similar composition.
I hope someone is tracking all the various current MPs now standing for new (minor) parties or as independents. It's often done in a fit of pique and results in a small voteshare, but it'd be interesting to see which ones perform best.
For example, according to Wiki Angus MacNeil is standing in Na h-Eileanan an Iar, as an independent not for Alba (maybe that will change).
Evening everyone. Certain poll companies are coming out with polls that have the intention of scaring Tory voters to come out and vote for their party. In reality the Tories will end up with 150 to 200 seats. From now to election night we will have to endure being told the party will get 60 to 80 seats etc. This is pure fantasy. No matter how unpopluar they are it will not happen.There may be people on here who believe this is the case or they say on their posts that they agree with these polls. However I doubt anyone is prepared to put their money where their mouth is and lay a bet down on this outcome even if they argue in favour of it on here. Most of us know this is not going to happen. Time will tell and we will soon have the election results thank goddness!
No. The poll companies are not 'coming out with polls that have the intention of scaring Tory voters to come out and vote for their party'.
The polls may prove to be right or they may prove to be wrong but there is no intent to influence voting among any of the polling companies quoted on here.
Has Trafalgar published any UK "polling" yet?
We don't seem to be plagued with rogue or deliberately biased polling companies in the UK fortunately.
I've seen some polling I thought was naughty push polling before. I can't even remember what it was for or who the pushing looked to be on behalf of, but I remember mentioning it here.
I'm sure we all have some that we take more seriously than others. I'm looking at past electoral records and relative stability (outside of events like Johnson taking over from May or Johnson's Government imploding or the Kamikwaze Budget).
MRPs are a dark art all of their own. YouGov may be better at them than they are at standard polling. Survation are probably the reverse of that.
Evening everyone. Certain poll companies are coming out with polls that have the intention of scaring Tory voters to come out and vote for their party. In reality the Tories will end up with 150 to 200 seats. From now to election night we will have to endure being told the party will get 60 to 80 seats etc. This is pure fantasy. No matter how unpopluar they are it will not happen.There may be people on here who believe this is the case or they say on their posts that they agree with these polls. However I doubt anyone is prepared to put their money where their mouth is and lay a bet down on this outcome even if they argue in favour of it on here. Most of us know this is not going to happen. Time will tell and we will soon have the election results thank goddness!
No. The poll companies are not 'coming out with polls that have the intention of scaring Tory voters to come out and vote for their party'.
The polls may prove to be right or they may prove to be wrong but there is no intent to influence voting among any of the polling companies quoted on here.
Has Trafalgar published any UK "polling" yet?
We don't seem to be plagued with rogue or deliberately biased polling companies in the UK fortunately.
Was it @rcs1000 who conclusively proved via mathematical analysis that Bow Tie Bob simply - er - made his polls up?
As another poster said earlier, and this is an imperfect comparison, but… Labour got 202 seats in 2019 with 32.1% of the vote.
The Tories are currently polling at around 8% less than that, and have the threat of the LDs in many seats and a resurgent Reform in others, even if you ignore Labour.
Let’s not forget at that election, Reform/BXP stood down in Tory seats, which they aren’t doing now.
Starmer doesn’t scare many Tory voters like Corbyn did, and they have more attractive alternatives.
Really don’t see how they magically get back to 30-35% / 200 seats ish simply because ‘that’s what *should* happen’. It will require substantive things in the campaign to happen if it does at all.
As I pointed out last week the Nowcasters are correct - because there is little reason why any voter will return to the tory party come the actual day of the election. SKS isn't Corbyn and won't scare them into voting Tory...
I’m expecting Rishi to throw the zinger I have given him: Starmer’s planned tax raid on struggling private schools, so beloved in their community and so vital to that aspiration of families that made UK so great in the first place, shows the real cheeks of Starmer’s arse. It will make Starmer stumble. He will have no answer. The media can then hammer it home over the next 4 weeks and reshape the polling.
Let’s be honest, this is the most difficult of elections to poll, especially MRP and seat forecast, is it not? Tories could get anything between 180 and, depending if they struggle to squeeze Reform, struggle with sit on their hands former voters, and/or hit by pin point tactical voting, fall as low as 100. That’s a lot of wide variables.
I’m to think, if Con don’t get much swingback on the polls from here, to finish 9 to 15 behind, that bigger gap more than 10, and evidence tactical LLG votes been so precise in elections this parliament it’s been pushing election results to the worst case of expectations every time for the Conservatives, they can end up on lower end of 100-180 MPs. They really can 😩
Sunak and the people he’s surrounded himself with in decision making, is a far bigger reason for how bad it is at this election, than putting greater blame on Boris and Truss. If you go down to historic and unthinkable low of near to 100 seats, there’s no convincing argument it would have been even worse than that if Boris was leading. A charming rascal always fairs better than a charmless man, as sure as the alpha male always beats the beta… the harder the beta male tries, the more they emit they just haven’t got it. Are we about to see that tonight?
Makes you wonder how many of those historical election results also was decided on the presidential aspect of leader v leader, rather than USP built by their parties?
If the Tories poll in the low 20s it's possible they will end up with a lot less than 100 seats...
I'm sure we all have some that we take more seriously than others. I'm looking at past electoral records and relative stability (outside of events like Johnson taking over from May or Johnson's Government imploding or the Kamikwaze Budget).
MRPs are a dark art all of their own. YouGov may be better at them than they are at standard polling. Survation are probably the reverse of that.
I also don’t envy pollsters this time around, because politics has changed so dramatically since 2019, and it must be very hard to build methodology to deal with it.
One question that interests me is whether we’re seeing the return of the commonly overstated Labour vote, which was often a thing during the Blair/Brown years.
So, just before the first debate starts, the position is:
Tories called a snap election 20 points behind Tories keep sliding further and further behind in normal polls Tories heading further and further into the abyss with every passing MRP poll Farage just getting started to chop the Tories into pieces
Sunak will - I suspect - be tetchy, angry and quite aggressive in the debate. He has a PLAN. Starmer is Jimmy SAVILLE. Why isn't ANYONE LISTENING?
As another poster said earlier, and this is an imperfect comparison, but… Labour got 202 seats in 2019 with 32.1% of the vote.
The Tories are currently polling at around 8% less than that, and have the threat of the LDs in many seats and a resurgent Reform in others, even if you ignore Labour.
Let’s not forget at that election, Reform/BXP stood down in Tory seats, which they aren’t doing now.
Starmer doesn’t scare many Tory voters like Corbyn did, and they have more attractive alternatives.
Really don’t see how they magically get back to 30-35% / 200 seats ish simply because ‘that’s what *should* happen’. It will require substantive things in the campaign to happen if it does at all.
I think the strongest case for why "it can't be as bad as all that" for the Tories is simply that, being in uncharted territory, we've stretched our models beyond their useful limits. But that's a better argument for saying "we don't know"!
The rest of the campaign is going to be so important. Do the Tories panic and risk making things worse? Is hubris a danger for Labour - and, if so, is there time for nemesis to strike? Will Starmer drop the Ming vase? Will one of his candidates wrestle it from him and smash it to the ground?
Let's hope that tonight's debate gives us some clues!
So, just before the first debate starts, the position is:
Tories called a snap election 20 points behind Tories keep sliding further and further behind in normal polls Tories heading further and further into the abyss with every passing MRP poll Farage just getting started to chop the Tories into pieces
Sunak will - I suspect - be tetchy, angry and quite aggressive in the debate. He has a PLAN. Starmer is Jimmy SAVILLE. Why isn't ANYONE LISTENING?
If Sunak mentions Saville personally (rather than relying on outriders) we will know they’re really worried in cchq.
I managed to lay 0 Reform seats yesterday at evens pre-Farage announcement and that is now trading at 4.9 Back / 11 Lay.
I’m green also on a number of higher Reform seat totals which have shot down today. Still a ton of movement on Reform on similar markets, wondering if anyone else is monitoring them?
Will likely trade out after Farage’s debate appearance depending on how that goes
Aberdeenshire North Dumfries Dumfriesshire Berwickshire Richmond & Northallerton (Rishi wins by 3.3%) Skipton Thisk Gainsborough Sleaford Boston Rutland Lichfield (Micky Fab holds on by 0.1%) Kingswinford & South Staffs North Shropshire (despite LD win in by-election) South Shropshire North Herefordshire Stratford Banbury Hitchin NW Essex (Kemi Badenoch wins by 2.3%) Maldon Brentwood Hornchurch Castle Point (by 1.1%) North Devon Tiverton Mid Dorset (despite being a LD seat between 2001 and 2015) North Dorset Salisbury Christchurch New Forest E New Forest W NE Hampshire NW Hampshire East Hampshire Hamble Valley Fareham Chippenham (despite being a LD seat recently) Melksham Aldershot Farnham Arundel Sussex Weald Tonbridge Sevenoaks East Surrey Surrey Heath (despite LDs hoping to win Gove's former seat) Maidenhead Beaconsfield Mid Bucks Ruislip (by 1%) Orpington
South Holland and Deepings is missing. Surely not.....
FPT - and related to a conversation being had a couple of hours ago - and of no importance really, but having spent ten minutes thinking about this, posting it and only then noticing the thread changedteo hours ago I'm buggered if I'm going to let it sit unnoticed on an old thread:
Australian Test skipper Pat Cummins has signed a four-year deal to play for San Francisco Unicorns in Major League Cricket, the USA's franchise league. It's a big statement from MLC - its debut season was in July last year, so it's a big clash with the UK summer. The knock-on effect on player availability for The Hundred, which is already pretty limited, could be huge.
If the Hundred going to become a tournament for the second tier talent, like European Tour of golf?
The thing is not playing T20, rather a different game, it doesn't play into the Indian billionaire's dream of having a tour carnival of franchises, with players signed to the parent organisation, that go around the world playing T20 every other month in a different country.
The Hundred is just a ridiculous competition. The quality of player is little to no better than what you get in the T20 Blast. Although the eliminator is included in my Surrey membership and that is usually good fun.
Its a total balls up in that the plan from the start was always to sell the competition and franchise to private equity. Who are the people with big bucks and into cricket, the Indians. What game do they want to promote, T20.
I understand they want to widen participation, grow the game, get families involved etc. But they also need money and the big money is turning T20 into a world tour where players are signed to the SuperKings, who then play in India, SA, USA, Middle East etc. They have already signalled they aren't interested in the Hundred by setting up the MLC that runs at exactly the same time.
Yep it's all very silly. Also as a spectator I can't help but feel a bit shortchanged when I go to matches. Too fast for the vibe of cricket.
Its not for me. I don't have kids, so I find it too kid focused and I don't like the forced American hype. I understand that T20 international have got a bad rep for too much of drinking culture, but in my experience the atmosphere can be electric without the need to have a hype MC.
I think they have it the wrong way around. T20 should be the elite competition, then another competition that is kid / family focused that might not have the best of the best, but cheap to go. You use the money from your profitable T20 competition to subsidise the family focused one.
You find time for this by getting rid of 50 over cricket entirely.
Agreed with all of that until the final para. You don't need to find time for it if it's nit an elite comp - you make it a bit B teamy.
Reasons I prefer the T20 to the Hundred: - More overs - Same format as T20 the world over - rather than pointless tweaks which add nothing. - The fonts and purple/green graphics of the Hundred. - It's Lancashire, where my grandfather was a member and to which I therefore feel some affinity - not Manchester, which is made up. And Lancashire has bettet songs and Lanky the Giraffe. - The Hundred is like watching BBC3 - it's terrified it's going to lose your attention. - The music is better at the T20. Sweet Caroline/Papa's got a brand new pigbag/ Tom Hark. Rather than the 1Xtra shite they play at the Hundred in a desperate attempt to appeal to the youth.
Reasons I prefer the Hundred: - It's in terrestrial telly.
I used to also love the T20 because it was so wonderfully cheap - £8 for an adult and £1 for a child in 2019! - but those days are gone, sadly. You get players you've heard of now, but I didn't mind the B team aspect of it for that price.
The atmosphere is good at both. Fill Old Trafford and you'll always have a good atmosphere. And both are genuinely brilliant for families. The Hundred had the double-header aspect - the women's game then the men's game - but the T20 appears to have adopted this too. It is in any case a double edged sword - more cricket is good, but my kids' attention probably doesn't extend to more than 40 overs of cricket yet.
I prefer 50 over cricket to 20 over cricket. But having a whole day to watch cricket is a very rare luxury. I'm much more likely to be able to spare 3 hours than a whole day.
Did anyone have the necessary mental fortitude to sit through the tory leader debates? How shit was Sunak in those?
I don't really expect the Gettysburg Address from SKS either. Whenever he speaks, no matter the subject, he sounds like a man reading the instructions for a dishwasher aloud at gunpoint.
So, just before the first debate starts, the position is:
Tories called a snap election 20 points behind Tories keep sliding further and further behind in normal polls Tories heading further and further into the abyss with every passing MRP poll Farage just getting started to chop the Tories into pieces
Sunak will - I suspect - be tetchy, angry and quite aggressive in the debate. He has a PLAN. Starmer is Jimmy SAVILLE. Why isn't ANYONE LISTENING?
If Sunak mentions Saville personally (rather than relying on outriders) we will know they’re really worried in cchq.
Odds on, surely. They think it’s a brilliant wheeze.
Did anyone have the necessary mental fortitude to sit through the tory leader debates? How shit was Sunak in those?
I don't really expect the Gettysburg Address from SKS either. Whenever he speaks, no matter the subject, he sounds like a man reading the instructions for a dishwasher aloud at gunpoint.
FPT - and related to a conversation being had a couple of hours ago - and of no importance really, but having spent ten minutes thinking about this, posting it and only then noticing the thread changedteo hours ago I'm buggered if I'm going to let it sit unnoticed on an old thread:
Australian Test skipper Pat Cummins has signed a four-year deal to play for San Francisco Unicorns in Major League Cricket, the USA's franchise league. It's a big statement from MLC - its debut season was in July last year, so it's a big clash with the UK summer. The knock-on effect on player availability for The Hundred, which is already pretty limited, could be huge.
If the Hundred going to become a tournament for the second tier talent, like European Tour of golf?
The thing is not playing T20, rather a different game, it doesn't play into the Indian billionaire's dream of having a tour carnival of franchises, with players signed to the parent organisation, that go around the world playing T20 every other month in a different country.
The Hundred is just a ridiculous competition. The quality of player is little to no better than what you get in the T20 Blast. Although the eliminator is included in my Surrey membership and that is usually good fun.
Its a total balls up in that the plan from the start was always to sell the competition and franchise to private equity. Who are the people with big bucks and into cricket, the Indians. What game do they want to promote, T20.
I understand they want to widen participation, grow the game, get families involved etc. But they also need money and the big money is turning T20 into a world tour where players are signed to the SuperKings, who then play in India, SA, USA, Middle East etc. They have already signalled they aren't interested in the Hundred by setting up the MLC that runs at exactly the same time.
Yep it's all very silly. Also as a spectator I can't help but feel a bit shortchanged when I go to matches. Too fast for the vibe of cricket.
Its not for me. I don't have kids, so I find it too kid focused and I don't like the forced American hype. I understand that T20 international have got a bad rep for too much of drinking culture, but in my experience the atmosphere can be electric without the need to have a hype MC.
I think they have it the wrong way around. T20 should be the elite competition, then another competition that is kid / family focused that might not have the best of the best, but cheap to go. You use the money from your profitable T20 competition to subsidise the family focused one.
You find time for this by getting rid of 50 over cricket entirely.
Agreed with all of that until the final para. You don't need to find time for it if it's nit an elite comp - you make it a bit B teamy.
Reasons I prefer the T20 to the Hundred: - More overs - Same format as T20 the world over - rather than pointless tweaks which add nothing. - The fonts and purple/green graphics of the Hundred. - It's Lancashire, where my grandfather was a member and to which I therefore feel some affinity - not Manchester, which is made up. And Lancashire has bettet songs and Lanky the Giraffe. - The Hundred is like watching BBC3 - it's terrified it's going to lose your attention. - The music is better at the T20. Sweet Caroline/Papa's got a brand new pigbag/ Tom Hark. Rather than the 1Xtra shite they play at the Hundred in a desperate attempt to appeal to the youth.
Reasons I prefer the Hundred: - It's in terrestrial telly.
I used to also love the T20 because it was so wonderfully cheap - £8 for an adult and £1 for a child in 2019! - but those days are gone, sadly. You get players you've heard of now, but I didn't mind the B team aspect of it for that price.
The atmosphere is good at both. Fill Old Trafford and you'll always have a good atmosphere. And both are genuinely brilliant for families. The Hundred had the double-header aspect - the women's game then the men's game - but the T20 appears to have adopted this too. It is in any case a double edged sword - more cricket is good, but my kids' attention probably doesn't extend to more than 40 overs of cricket yet.
I prefer 50 over cricket to 20 over cricket. But having a whole day to watch cricket is a very rare luxury. I'm much more likely to be able to spare 3 hours than a whole day.
Also, I took my parents to the T20 on Sunday and my mother - who I don't think has ever watched professional sport live before - absolutely loved it and asked to go again on Friday. A new enthusiasm for her mid-70s. It's not just about the kids.
Talking of inconveniences I’ve just realised that no mains power in Odessa = no aircon
first world problems, eh?
Given the frequent missile, drone and clusterbomb attacks on Odessa, evidenced by the damage all around me, I’m gonna say this is a bit worse than a “first world problem”
However I suspect that was your sly intent, so fair enough! It is also very stimulating
The ultimate first world problem I have encountered was in the hotel at Montrachet. Due to the chefs tasters between courses in the 11 course menu, you lose track of whether you are on course 7 or 8.
I can report that the seaplanes between Maldivian 5 star hotels can get a bit hot. I once flew in 6 in 10 days and got mildly peeved by the end
“Of FFS ANOTHER seaplane?? Where’s this one going? The Four Seasons? Bollocks to that”
Etc
The screeching noise that solid gold cutlery when you cut meat makes is simply painful to the ears
One of the lenses to view an election campaign through is like one of Lordsiralan's Business Tasks on The Apprentice. No, it's not real, but how a party manages the complex logistics of a general election campaign is a decent hint of whether they're capable of running the country.
See Labour 1983 if you don't believe me.
Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that the current government can't arrange for their ministers to be in the right place on the right day, but it's very emblematic of something.
(Poor Flick Drummond. Having lost the selection battle for Fareham, she's probably doomed anyway in Winchester, but this is not what she needs.)
"The underlying data doesn't match the seat numbers. If you look at who's leading in each seat, they go:
Lab 505 C 54 L Dem 44 SNP 24 PC 2 Ref UK 0"
Yes they’ve used a probabilistic approach as outlined in their methodology, so e.g. if Reform have a 50% chance in 4 seats, they get 2 seats on the total.
Hmmm... But the probabilities are linked, so if they have enough votes to win one of the four, then they probably have enough to win others.
But there are two different uncertainties. One of which is linked and one of which is not.
Australian Test skipper Pat Cummins has signed a four-year deal to play for San Francisco Unicorns in Major League Cricket, the USA's franchise league. It's a big statement from MLC - its debut season was in July last year, so it's a big clash with the UK summer. The knock-on effect on player availability for The Hundred, which is already pretty limited, could be huge.
If the Hundred going to become a tournament for the second tier talent, like European Tour of golf?
The thing is not playing T20, rather a different game, it doesn't play into the Indian billionaire's dream of having a tour carnival of franchises, with players signed to the parent organisation, that go around the world playing T20 every other month in a different country.
The Hundred is just a ridiculous competition. The quality of player is little to no better than what you get in the T20 Blast. Although the eliminator is included in my Surrey membership and that is usually good fun.
Its a total balls up in that the plan from the start was always to sell the competition and franchise to private equity. Who are the people with big bucks and into cricket, the Indians. What game do they want to promote, T20.
I understand they want to widen participation, grow the game, get families involved etc. But they also need money and the big money is turning T20 into a world tour where players are signed to the SuperKings, who then play in India, SA, USA, Middle East etc. They have already signalled they aren't interested in the Hundred by setting up the MLC that runs at exactly the same time.
Yep it's all very silly. Also as a spectator I can't help but feel a bit shortchanged when I go to matches. Too fast for the vibe of cricket.
Its not for me. I don't have kids, so I find it too kid focused and I don't like the forced American hype. I understand that T20 international have got a bad rep for too much of drinking culture, but in my experience the atmosphere can be electric without the need to have a hype MC.
I think they have it the wrong way around. T20 should be the elite competition, then another competition that is kid / family focused that might not have the best of the best, but cheap to go. You use the money from your profitable T20 competition to subsidise the family focused one.
You find time for this by getting rid of 50 over cricket entirely.
Agreed with all of that until the final para. You don't need to find time for it if it's nit an elite comp - you make it a bit B teamy.
Reasons I prefer the T20 to the Hundred: - More overs - Same format as T20 the world over - rather than pointless tweaks which add nothing. - The fonts and purple/green graphics of the Hundred. - It's Lancashire, where my grandfather was a member and to which I therefore feel some affinity - not Manchester, which is made up. And Lancashire has bettet songs and Lanky the Giraffe. - The Hundred is like watching BBC3 - it's terrified it's going to lose your attention. - The music is better at the T20. Sweet Caroline/Papa's got a brand new pigbag/ Tom Hark. Rather than the 1Xtra shite they play at the Hundred in a desperate attempt to appeal to the youth.
Reasons I prefer the Hundred: - It's in terrestrial telly.
Most Blast games are free to stream on YouTube.
The Hundred isn't called the Blundred for no reason.
Opening statements Sunak – A plan and bold action is needed. No one knows what Labour will do, but you know me. I’ll cut taxes and reduce immigration. Clear plan for a secure future for your family. Starmer – Election all about choice, turn the page on chaos and rebuild with Labour. I have a practical plan, and have changed Labour. Will make the country work for your family.
Opening statements Sunak – A plan and bold action is needed. No one knows what Labour will do, but you know me. I’ll cut taxes and reduce immigration. Clear plan for a secure future for your family. Starmer – Election all about choice, turn the page on chaos and rebuild with Labour. I have a practical plan, and have changed Labour. Will make the country work for your family.
Opening statements Sunak – A plan and bold action is needed. No one knows what Labour will do, but you know me. I’ll cut taxes and reduce immigration. Clear plan for a secure future for your family. Starmer – Election all about choice, turn the page on chaos and rebuild with Labour. I have a practical plan, and have changed Labour. Will make the country work for your family.
Rishi stiff, but clear. Starmer workmanlike.
£2000 of labour tax rises? where are they getting that from.
Huddersfield woman: I work full time and am broke as fuck Sunak: robotic list of all the things I've already done to make you this well off Starmer: emotive I know how hard this is, you know how much the Tories have shat the economy
Opening statements Sunak – A plan and bold action is needed. No one knows what Labour will do, but you know me. I’ll cut taxes and reduce immigration. Clear plan for a secure future for your family. Starmer – Election all about choice, turn the page on chaos and rebuild with Labour. I have a practical plan, and have changed Labour. Will make the country work for your family.
Rishi stiff, but clear. Starmer workmanlike.
£2000 of labour tax rises? where are they getting that from.
Opening statements Sunak – A plan and bold action is needed. No one knows what Labour will do, but you know me. I’ll cut taxes and reduce immigration. Clear plan for a secure future for your family. Starmer – Election all about choice, turn the page on chaos and rebuild with Labour. I have a practical plan, and have changed Labour. Will make the country work for your family.
Rishi stiff, but clear. Starmer workmanlike.
Been watching Only Fans, has he?
I bet milkshake girl is chuffed to bits given the free advertising her Onlyfans page is getting.
Did anyone have the necessary mental fortitude to sit through the tory leader debates? How shit was Sunak in those?
I don't really expect the Gettysburg Address from SKS either. Whenever he speaks, no matter the subject, he sounds like a man reading the instructions for a dishwasher aloud at gunpoint.
😄 Any time I hear Starmer from now on, I will be wondering whether it is Bosch, Hotpoint or Indesit!
I'm sure we all have some that we take more seriously than others. I'm looking at past electoral records and relative stability (outside of events like Johnson taking over from May or Johnson's Government imploding or the Kamikwaze Budget).
MRPs are a dark art all of their own. YouGov may be better at them than they are at standard polling. Survation are probably the reverse of that.
I also don’t envy pollsters this time around, because politics has changed so dramatically since 2019, and it must be very hard to build methodology to deal with it.
One question that interests me is whether we’re seeing the return of the commonly overstated Labour vote, which was often a thing during the Blair/Brown years.
I suspect so - though not by all pollsters (let alone in all polls). I am currently minded to accept the smallest polled gap - currenlty 14. That is almost certainy where we are or generous to the Cons. Which is gopod enough for me.
Opening statements Sunak – A plan and bold action is needed. No one knows what Labour will do, but you know me. I’ll cut taxes and reduce immigration. Clear plan for a secure future for your family. Starmer – Election all about choice, turn the page on chaos and rebuild with Labour. I have a practical plan, and have changed Labour. Will make the country work for your family.
Opening statements Sunak – A plan and bold action is needed. No one knows what Labour will do, but you know me. I’ll cut taxes and reduce immigration. Clear plan for a secure future for your family. Starmer – Election all about choice, turn the page on chaos and rebuild with Labour. I have a practical plan, and have changed Labour. Will make the country work for your family.
Rishi stiff, but clear. Starmer workmanlike.
£2000 of labour tax rises? where are they getting that from.
Labour's Schrodingers policy that is both a blank sheet and includes tax rises.
Question – cost of living – Worked since 15. Very difficult to make ends meat. Food bill doubled, in arrears on bills, savings gone. What can you do?
Sunak – I know how much strain has put on your family finances and for everyone. Economy growing again thanks to my plan. Know you only just starting to see benefits. Choice is my clear plan and bold action or high taxes with Labour.
Starmer – must be difficult for you and millions in similar position. Truss crashed economy and made things worse, Government lost control and you pay price. Truss again. We have to stop chaos and rebuild.
Clear plan and bold action is already Rishi’s catchphrase. Stop chaos and rebuild is Keirs.
Starmer – if things are working why call election now? It’s not working Sunak - he told me to call election and now complaints, he has no plan. My plan is working. He will put up taxes.
Sunak seemed more genuine on this answer than his opening. Starmer making an effort to address the questioner, Sunak already interrupting him, Keir retorting about government raising taxes.
Sunak seems to be incapable of changing his speech register between delivering a statement and addressing an individual. It makes him sound incredibly inauthentic.
Sunak seems to be incapable of changing his speech register between delivering a statement and addressing an individual. It makes him sound incredibly inauthentic.
Big bags under his eyes caked in makeup, too - clearly lacking sleep. Starmer looks chirpier, but the campaign's going to have been tough on both of them.
Comments
Repeating the question Sunak got from a worker in the audience is probably the best punch of all Starmer can throw - after your VPN and all the lockdown partying, why should the voters ever trust you again?
One of the facts that always astounds me is that of the 8 seats the LDs retained in 2015, they only hold 2 of them today, both with the same MP
Orkney and Shetland
Westmoreland and Lonsdale
In some of the others they are still in contention and will probably win them back (as they have already won back several lost in 2015), but in others despite holding on in 2015 they are falling back and and are not even close for second anymore like Leeds North West.
I’m to think, if Con don’t get much swingback on the polls from here, to finish 9 to 15 behind, that bigger gap more than 10, and evidence tactical LLG votes been so precise in elections this parliament it’s been pushing election results to the worst case of expectations every time for the Conservatives, they can end up on lower end of 100-180 MPs. They really can 😩
Sunak and the people he’s surrounded himself with in decision making, is a far bigger reason for how bad it is at this election, than putting greater blame on Boris and Truss. If you go down to historic and unthinkable low of near to 100 seats, there’s no convincing argument it would have been even worse than that if Boris was leading. A charming rascal always fairs better than a charmless man, as sure as the alpha male always beats the beta… the harder the beta male tries, the more they emit they just haven’t got it. Are we about to see that tonight?
Makes you wonder how many of those historical election results also was decided on the presidential aspect of leader v leader, rather than USP built by their parties?
Apply that to your own daily life
The Tories are currently polling at around 8% less than that, and have the threat of the LDs in many seats and a resurgent Reform in others, even if you ignore Labour.
Let’s not forget at that election, Reform/BXP stood down in Tory seats, which they aren’t doing now.
Starmer doesn’t scare many Tory voters like Corbyn did, and they have more attractive alternatives.
Really don’t see how they magically get back to 30-35% / 200 seats ish simply because ‘that’s what *should* happen’. It will require substantive things in the campaign to happen if it does at all.
For example, according to Wiki Angus MacNeil is standing in Na h-Eileanan an Iar, as an independent not for Alba (maybe that will change).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SHLx7LOlRg
I'm sure we all have some that we take more seriously than others. I'm looking at past electoral records and relative stability (outside of events like Johnson taking over from May or Johnson's Government imploding or the Kamikwaze Budget).
MRPs are a dark art all of their own. YouGov may be better at them than they are at standard polling. Survation are probably the reverse of that.
And the Shadow Defence Secretary's dismissal yesterday of women's safety as a "distraction".
Crime - especially against the vulnerable - should surely be a key issue.
Watch for it - MoonRabbit’s Hay Maker!
xx
One question that interests me is whether we’re seeing the return of the commonly overstated Labour vote, which was often a thing during the Blair/Brown years.
Tories called a snap election 20 points behind
Tories keep sliding further and further behind in normal polls
Tories heading further and further into the abyss with every passing MRP poll
Farage just getting started to chop the Tories into pieces
Sunak will - I suspect - be tetchy, angry and quite aggressive in the debate. He has a PLAN. Starmer is Jimmy SAVILLE. Why isn't ANYONE LISTENING?
https://x.com/brianklaas/status/1798063575606722775?s=61
I think the strongest case for why "it can't be as bad as all that" for the Tories is simply that, being in uncharted territory, we've stretched our models beyond their useful limits. But that's a better argument for saying "we don't know"!
The rest of the campaign is going to be so important. Do the Tories panic and risk making things worse? Is hubris a danger for Labour - and, if so, is there time for nemesis to strike? Will Starmer drop the Ming vase? Will one of his candidates wrestle it from him and smash it to the ground?
Let's hope that tonight's debate gives us some clues!
I’m green also on a number of higher Reform seat totals which have shot down today. Still a ton of movement on Reform on similar markets, wondering if anyone else is monitoring them?
Will likely trade out after Farage’s debate appearance depending on how that goes
I don't really expect the Gettysburg Address from SKS either. Whenever he speaks, no matter the subject, he sounds like a man reading the instructions for a dishwasher aloud at gunpoint.
I need say no more.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13494115/I-just-felt-like-Woman-25-arrested-throwing-milkshake-Nigel-Farage-doesnt-represent-believe-Reform-UK-leader-incident-frightening.html
How much, if at all, do you want Nigel Farage to be elected to the House of Commons as an MP?
All Britons
A great deal/fair amount: 27%
Not very much/not at all: 58%
2019 Conservative voters
A great deal/fair amount: 51%
Not very much/not at all: 36%
yougov.co.uk/topics/politic…
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1798025670401966205?t=F9bTmz5xQB5qu5LFS-dYJw&s=19
One of the lenses to view an election campaign through is like one of Lordsiralan's Business Tasks on The Apprentice. No, it's not real, but how a party manages the complex logistics of a general election campaign is a decent hint of whether they're capable of running the country.
See Labour 1983 if you don't believe me.
Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised that the current government can't arrange for their ministers to be in the right place on the right day, but it's very emblematic of something.
(Poor Flick Drummond. Having lost the selection battle for Fareham, she's probably doomed anyway in Winchester, but this is not what she needs.)
The Hundred isn't called the Blundred for no reason.
Sunak – Weird grin
Starmer – Weird posture
Opening statements
Sunak – A plan and bold action is needed. No one knows what Labour will do, but you know me. I’ll cut taxes and reduce immigration. Clear plan for a secure future for your family.
Starmer – Election all about choice, turn the page on chaos and rebuild with Labour. I have a practical plan, and have changed Labour. Will make the country work for your family.
Rishi stiff, but clear. Starmer workmanlike.
Perhaps the studio should be beige
How can Sunak claim it’s his plan to bring inflation under control. It’s the MPC doing it.
Yiddish humour missing. But the debate format looks encouraging.
"Shumac and Shtarmer shtick it to each other."
Sunak: robotic list of all the things I've already done to make you this well off
Starmer: emotive I know how hard this is, you know how much the Tories have shat the economy
Worked since 15. Very difficult to make ends meat. Food bill doubled, in arrears on bills, savings gone. What can you do?
Sunak – I know how much strain has put on your family finances and for everyone. Economy growing again thanks to my plan. Know you only just starting to see benefits. Choice is my clear plan and bold action or high taxes with Labour.
Starmer – must be difficult for you and millions in similar position. Truss crashed economy and made things worse, Government lost control and you pay price. Truss again. We have to stop chaos and rebuild.
Clear plan and bold action is already Rishi’s catchphrase. Stop chaos and rebuild is Keirs.
Starmer – if things are working why call election now? It’s not working
Sunak - he told me to call election and now complaints, he has no plan. My plan is working. He will put up taxes.
Sunak seemed more genuine on this answer than his opening. Starmer making an effort to address the questioner, Sunak already interrupting him, Keir retorting about government raising taxes.