ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
Again, it didn’t work in London, where it actually exists. Not sure it can shift the dial anywhere else where it’s not even been proposed.
It's pretty clear from the distribution of results that ULEZ did make a difference, just not enough.
My reading is that Stodge thinks Conservatives are more likely to win than Labour in Croydon East, but the odds are 10/1. That's a huge level if disagreement, and suggests there are good betting opportunities out there in the markets - not necessarily saying that one side or the other has it right.
Stodge is going above the parapet, to give some thoughts and tips. That’s to be encouraged on a blog like this.
Like those who posted more than two years ago, that Thangham Debbenaire was going to lose her seat to a green - what a long range call that was.
As a Synesthete, Stodge can “smell” things in polling the rest of us can’t.
I consistently said that the Cons would wait until 2025 for the GE so was wrong about that.
But they did call it when we had had good growth figures, less bad inflation numbers, and it seems that Rishi was making a bet on interest rates at the time also.
So bonkers to call it but there was some thinking behind the decision.
A week before horrific migration numbers??
I agreed about the election date. And suggest there’s a horrendous something due before long.
I do wonder if absent some really Big Thing, this election campaign is over? We have upcoming football and tennis and frankly, any other distraction you can take from politics before we vote.
I thought you were getting really good feedback on the doorstep, though?
Yes, but when the PM is blasting away at his own feet with large calibre weaponry, it is not helpful!
I just think voters generally have tuned out.
I've used you as an arbiter so far of "the other side". You gave me some confidence it might still be a tighter result than expected.
Are you therefore conceding that the Tories are going to lose too? By how much do you think?
Also on Mordaunt, she will get cancelled by the Tories for being "woke".
Likewise Badenoch as I posted the other day.
The Tories need to give up on these silly culture war debating points. You've won, Labour have adopted your policy.
I thought Badenoch was herself an anti-woke warrior.
She has rebranded herself. In 2022 she was saying how good self ID was.
Kevin the Minion is definitely on maneuvers in the DM this morning. Apparently, Brexit was and is great and she's sending her kids to work in Dirty Ron's.
There is not a single voter in the country who needs a journalist to tell them this. There is not a single poster or lurker on PB who needed you to tell us this, so why did you post it?
What do we think was the strategy? All built around the 2K Lie? Which Penny persisted with to ridicule and disbelief.
Once something like that falls apart so quickly, so cuts through not as a Labour tax rise but as a lie, each mention, billboard and advert is actually hurting the Conservative vote.
Calling a Snappy Lec without a strong campaign ready, without a strong strategy ready, is this the nub of what’s gone wrong - to the disbelief of Tory members and MPs?
You've literately been ramping how well the Tories have been doing for weeks. You are a joke.
Don’t be mean to @MoonRabbit - she is that rarest of things
1 a female pb-er (um, I think) And 2. Committed Tory (even rarer)
Strange to see the esoteric teachings of Vajrayana Buddhism, at the level of a Highest Yoga Tantra practitioner, make an appearance on PB. Not quite bold enough thinking though. Species, planets, form realms and dimension changes need to be in there. On which point, where's the Saturday troll?
Sunak's entire strategy was that he won a by-election narrowly and so completely abandoned "competence" and went for that rubbish. One of the dumbest things I have ever seen.
I do wonder if absent some really Big Thing, this election campaign is over? We have upcoming football and tennis and frankly, any other distraction you can take from politics before we vote.
I thought you were getting really good feedback on the doorstep, though?
Yes, but when the PM is blasting away at his own feet with large calibre weaponry, it is not helpful!
I just think voters generally have tuned out.
After last night, I'd not put too much faith in a bounce from the Euros.
David Davis was cosplaying Hezza last night with his 'the feedback on the doorsteps is not like the polls!' Schtick. However, I do wonder how much of the Change/Labour vote is actually keen enough to bother, especially as it looks a done and dusted deal. Change is all SKS and Labour offer, there no policy hook, no idealogical hook. I think the more it looks done, the more a lot peel away to 'meh' or George or Reform whereas the remaining Tories will just trudge along and vote Tory Big gap elections always seem to be less so on the day
You've argued for a while that the Workers Party will do well, but look how few candidates they've managed to nominate, contrary to their boasting they'd stand in every constituency.
The Workers couldn’t find £300k in deposits, and 600 vetted people to stand for them?
Given that their leader wouldn’t pass any sensible sort of vetting, why bother with their other candidates?
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
I guarantee you it will *not* be effective. Look at any poll on the key issues worrying voters and car restrictions will not be there. Most people are worried about 1. paying their rent/mortgage and other bills, 2. the state of the health service, 3. other public services, 4. immigration, 5. housing, 6. crime.
Mordaunt -19 in the debate. To be honest I’d have scored her net positive so I do wonder again if it’s just another sign the public gave up with the Tories long ago.
About 2.6 years ago to be precise. That's when the ship began sinking after Captain Boris crashed it into some rocks, then Truss drilled a whole in the bottom, Sunak patched it up with some emergency planks, but they've been taking on water constantly since, and about 3 weeks ago he decided to jump on the planks to reopen the hole.
I do think we will come to believe that this election was lost in 2022.
Johnson should have gone after Hartlepool and he'd have won a landslide then. That was the peak and it's been downhill ever since.
Of course, the Tories were never truly popular but SKS for a while was doing terribly. So the Tories had room there to defeat him.
Support for Labour is a mile wide but an inch deep.
They are primarily a rejection mechanism for the present administration- their fundamentals are pretty poor.
The Tories pledge to roll back devolution to stop 20mph zones in Wales.
I assume that devolution is not as passionately held in Wales as in Scotland? It's only a few Tories who seriously consider reversing it up here, and my impression is that Wales does not have the same left wing majority in favour of it.
That aside, I presume the announcement is not actually about Wales but rather stirring the petrolheads of England up.
First, Scottish independence is not particularly a left-wing cause. Don't make the mistake of assigning every policy you dislike to your opponents. Second, Scottish & Welsh independence movements are different: Scots more about economics; Welsh about culture.
Point 1: Did not suggest that. I just can't think of anyone on the left in Scotland that would reverse devolution, while there are a few on the right. Point 2: Interesting!
SKS must have had one of the most remarkable turnarounds in history (assuming he wins).
In 2021 he was almost as unpopular as Corbyn. I know people say he's got no talent but the Tories imploding doesn't explain the improvement in his ratings in that time.
My strong feeling is that after 2021 he got Blair and Mandelson in.
My reading is that Stodge thinks Conservatives are more likely to win than Labour in Croydon East, but the odds are 10/1. That's a huge level if disagreement, and suggests there are good betting opportunities out there in the markets - not necessarily saying that one side or the other has it right.
Stodge is going above the parapet, to give some thoughts and tips. That’s to be encouraged on a blog like this.
Like those who posted more than two years ago, that Thangham Debbenaire was going to lose her seat to a green - what a long range call that was.
As a Synesthete, Stodge can “smell” things in polling the rest of us can’t.
Clearly New Addington is the kind of place that registered 30, 40 point swings last time. As an extrapolation of trend among one demographic, it makes sense, but my question is whether the trend has reversed, either on a technicality due to Reform, or as suggested in the 2024 local elections, absolutely in favour of Labour.
There is not a single voter in the country who needs a journalist to tell them this. There is not a single poster or lurker on PB who needed you to tell us this, so why did you post it?
What do we think was the strategy? All built around the 2K Lie? Which Penny persisted with to ridicule and disbelief.
Once something like that falls apart so quickly, so cuts through not as a Labour tax rise but as a lie, each mention, billboard and advert is actually hurting the Conservative vote.
Calling a Snappy Lec without a strong campaign ready, without a strong strategy ready, is this the nub of what’s gone wrong - to the disbelief of Tory members and MPs?
I must say for me Horse's post is useful because, taken altogether, it hints that some Tories may be even be thinking of dumping Sunak now.
That would be fairly crazy at this stage, ofcourse, but then again this has been a crazy election period overall, so anything can happen,
Is it possible to dump a sitting PM? I know it might be in theory, but is there time?
He's PM until he can't command a majority in the House, but there is no House at the moment. He could be binned as leader of the Conservatives I suppose, but that would just be farcical. Prime Minister but not leader of the Conservatives (hello Chamberlain and Churchill - but that was in the middle of WWII - perhaps not that daft then given Sunak's National Service pledge).
There isn't time, and any attempt would push them into single figures in the polls.
He can’t be binned as leader of the Conservatives against his will, because there’s no 1922 committee because there’s no MPs.
Yes, it was said Sir Graham Brady fielded a lot of calls from MPs desperate to activate their no confidence letters on the day Rishi called the election, but by then it was too late.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
She's not been giving a major government job besides Leader of the House in years. I doubt that is purely down to jealousy from the sitting PM.
Jealousy probably is why Liz Truss sidelined Mordaunt as Leader of the House (cf Boris and JRM) but it backfired when HMQ's demise made Penny the most famous sword-carrier in the land, eclipsing Truss herself for most of her seven weeks in office.
Wasn’t the sword-carrying at the Coronation, several months after La Truss had departed the stage?
I’d always planned to sell Reform bets after Farage’s first debate - maybe once D-Day gate has taken effect in the polls. A big surge of hype for Reform/Farage should see their odds tumble further for the next few days.
Do we think:
A. The red meat like stamp duty and ULEZ scrapping in the Tory manifesto will boost the Tories back up next week - this is the shortest that Reform odds will get. Best to sell now.
OR
B. Crossover might hold a bit longer - better to keep it going for a bit, see how it goes, and sell Reform bets closer to polling day
OR
C. Hold until the end for the hopes of long odds payouts - MRPs are too hard to guess and the Canada ‘93 wipeout might actually happen.
I consistently said that the Cons would wait until 2025 for the GE so was wrong about that.
But they did call it when we had had good growth figures, less bad inflation numbers, and it seems that Rishi was making a bet on interest rates at the time also.
So bonkers to call it but there was some thinking behind the decision.
A week before horrific migration numbers??
I agreed about the election date. And suggest there’s a horrendous something due before long.
I think you’re in the right direction. The inflation figures last month were not as good as hoped. That meant no scope for tax cuts this Autumn. No tax cuts would have been horrendous for Rishi in the party. So he went now because he didn’t want the election during the summer holidays. That’s the future event Rishi could predict with some certainty. I can’t think of another he can.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
We are at the point where nothing will be effective. Folk have stopped listening. And even when they do, they automatically think lie.
Mordaunt -19 in the debate. To be honest I’d have scored her net positive so I do wonder again if it’s just another sign the public gave up with the Tories long ago.
About 2.6 years ago to be precise. That's when the ship began sinking after Captain Boris crashed it into some rocks, then Truss drilled a whole in the bottom, Sunak patched it up with some emergency planks, but they've been taking on water constantly since, and about 3 weeks ago he decided to jump on the planks to reopen the hole.
I do think we will come to believe that this election was lost in 2022.
Johnson should have gone after Hartlepool and he'd have won a landslide then. That was the peak and it's been downhill ever since.
Of course, the Tories were never truly popular but SKS for a while was doing terribly. So the Tories had room there to defeat him.
Support for Labour is a mile wide but an inch deep.
They are primarily a rejection mechanism for the present administration- their fundamentals are pretty poor.
A close eye will be paid to local elections in 2025-2027 I expect.
I don't think the hectoring style was her comformt zone yesterday. She could turn herself into a sort of slightly more military Jacinda Ardern, appealing to the centre.
Penny would be legendary if she had
a) A moderately right wing stance, around the Leadsom/Geoffrey Cox marker - she's done herself in with the squelchy wokery, which is dating badly
b) Someone to do all the work for her. She's more of a front person it seems than a grafter. Which is fine - we've seen with Rishi where spreadsheets get you. We can't all be Thatcher, but you do need the right team around you.
Sadly, she doesn't.
I don't think she has the intellectual heft or depth, sadly.
It becomes apparent in debate where her appearance and delivery is initially good but as soon as she gets off her prepared position, she can't think on her feet and embarrasses herself.
The odds I have been following most closely are those on the Con v Reform match bet.
At one point this hit Cons 1.5, Reform 3 (£100s offered), although it is now 1.4 / 3.5 and the market is thinner.
This would be the biggest electoral shock in about a century. Plenty of cash to be made.
Problem is Reform aren't standing in a 100 or so seats - that gives the Conservatives a massive advantage because the only seat they aren't standing in is Rotherham...
Reform are only missing 20 in the end
A lot of them are not much more than paper candidates though.
That's certainly true in my constituency. Their representative is,I am sure, a sweet kid, but he'll be doing well to save his deposit.
Does he have no common sense? How did he see D-Day playing well?
So, I got that wrong. I didn't hear a single person mention or talk about D-Day beforehand and it was looking like it'd go by totally uncommented upon.
I think it just encapsulates everyone's concerns about Sunak perfectly, and that's why it's resonated.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
I guarantee you it will *not* be effective. Look at any poll on the key issues worrying voters and car restrictions will not be there. Most people are worried about 1. paying their rent/mortgage and other bills, 2. the state of the health service, 3. other public services, 4. immigration, 5. housing, 6. crime.
Relatively effective, I suppose. A percent, max? Remember this is targeting Reform and Red Wall voters, not the centre (who will likely be put off even more).
And the opposition to ULEZ stems from increased costs for low income people running old cars, so ties in with your point 1.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
She's not been giving a major government job besides Leader of the House in years. I doubt that is purely down to jealousy from the sitting PM.
Jealousy probably is why Liz Truss sidelined Mordaunt as Leader of the House (cf Boris and JRM) but it backfired when HMQ's demise made Penny the most famous sword-carrier in the land, eclipsing Truss herself for most of her seven weeks in office.
Wasn’t the sword-carrying at the Coronation, several months after La Truss had departed the stage?
Erm, maybe, but Mordaunt was front and centre at the Queen's funeral, and possibly at the accession or ceremony of the leaky fountain pens.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
I'm struggling to think of anything Rory Stewart did in his nine years in parliament.
Apart that is from giving a very bizarre performance in a Conservative leadership debate.
Yet he has somehow been elevated to the position of the hypothetical Conservative leader who people who have no intention of voting Conservative claim would persuade them to vote Conservative but in reality wouldn't.
Mordaunt -19 in the debate. To be honest I’d have scored her net positive so I do wonder again if it’s just another sign the public gave up with the Tories long ago.
About 2.6 years ago to be precise. That's when the ship began sinking after Captain Boris crashed it into some rocks, then Truss drilled a whole in the bottom, Sunak patched it up with some emergency planks, but they've been taking on water constantly since, and about 3 weeks ago he decided to jump on the planks to reopen the hole.
I do think we will come to believe that this election was lost in 2022.
Johnson should have gone after Hartlepool and he'd have won a landslide then. That was the peak and it's been downhill ever since.
Of course, the Tories were never truly popular but SKS for a while was doing terribly. So the Tories had room there to defeat him.
Support for Labour is a mile wide but an inch deep.
They are primarily a rejection mechanism for the present administration- their fundamentals are pretty poor.
As Reform is showing, Tory support is an inch wide and an inch deep. The Cubic Inch Party. How’s them fundamentals?
The odds I have been following most closely are those on the Con v Reform match bet.
At one point this hit Cons 1.5, Reform 3 (£100s offered), although it is now 1.4 / 3.5 and the market is thinner.
This would be the biggest electoral shock in about a century. Plenty of cash to be made.
Problem is Reform aren't standing in a 100 or so seats - that gives the Conservatives a massive advantage because the only seat they aren't standing in is Rotherham...
Reform are only missing 20 in the end
A lot of them are not much more than paper candidates though.
That's certainly true in my constituency. Their representative is,I am sure, a sweet kid, but he'll be doing well to save his deposit.
Oh certainly, I think they will massively underperform in many seats. It's technically 609 I've realised, they have withdrawn support from Horsham and Leeds/Pudsey candidates
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
She's not been giving a major government job besides Leader of the House in years. I doubt that is purely down to jealousy from the sitting PM.
Jealousy probably is why Liz Truss sidelined Mordaunt as Leader of the House (cf Boris and JRM) but it backfired when HMQ's demise made Penny the most famous sword-carrier in the land, eclipsing Truss herself for most of her seven weeks in office.
Wasn’t the sword-carrying at the Coronation, several months after La Truss had departed the stage?
Yes. Penny did get to read out some stuff at the accession, but that was more low key.
I consistently said that the Cons would wait until 2025 for the GE so was wrong about that.
But they did call it when we had had good growth figures, less bad inflation numbers, and it seems that Rishi was making a bet on interest rates at the time also.
So bonkers to call it but there was some thinking behind the decision.
A week before horrific migration numbers??
I agreed about the election date. And suggest there’s a horrendous something due before long.
I tend to the cock-up rather than conspiracy side of this argument...
Sunak said some time ago the GE would be H2, but in recent months he's got despondent about the whole PM/election thing so he's taken the earliest H2 opportunity he could. The sooner it's all over and he can jet off to California, the better for him (and us, tbf).
A mutiny and public withdrawal of support would mean he would have to step down, though. But perhaps the conditions of the election mean a replacement couldn't be confirmed ?
I wonder if there any outlier scenarios though, there. Did any previous Tory coronations bypass the party's own internal rules on leadership elections ?
'Back to Newbury now where Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey has been speaking to reporters after his game of tennis. One of topics he was asked was about the Conservatives’ pledge to reverse the Ultra Low Emission Zone (Ulez) expansion in London - something we reported on a little earlier.
The Lib Dem leader responded saying: "The Conservatives have had a year to do this since the Labour mayor brought it in, they've not done it. It's funny that they come up with these policies at election time.”'- BBC Liveblog
Davey has spotted the little wrinkle there.
Hmm. But that gives the impression he doesn't want to express himself on the substantive issue, for fear of offending one side or the other. I must admit I don't know what Lib Dem policy is on ULEZ.
Outer London was significantly worse for Khan. You could attribute that to different things, but I see no reason to assume the ULEZ wasn't a meaningful part of it.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Telling all the remainers like Stewar, Hammond, Grieve, Gauke that they shouldn't be Tories any more - another 15 million IQ move from Dom.
That mob? They were even worse than Sunak and co! In fact they were worse.
Stewart oversaw harmful Defra cuts.
Grieve initiated voting ID.
Gauke was behind lots of unnecessary austerity and cruel benefit stopping measures.
David Davis was cosplaying Hezza last night with his 'the feedback on the doorsteps is not like the polls!' Schtick. However, I do wonder how much of the Change/Labour vote is actually keen enough to bother, especially as it looks a done and dusted deal. Change is all SKS and Labour offer, there no policy hook, no idealogical hook. I think the more it looks done, the more a lot peel away to 'meh' or George or Reform whereas the remaining Tories will just trudge along and vote Tory Big gap elections always seem to be less so on the day
That's why I think the Labour share could be a bit lower than the polls are saying.
I think most people would still be shocked if the actual election matched the 20%+ leads.
However, has there been any research/past polling, to suggest that people are more likely to reluctantly trudge out and vote for the losers in an election, than go and vote for the likely winners?
I've been out and about on multiple election days, and it always felt like the opposite was more likely.
Pretty sure the latest polls have also said that Labour's "definite to vote" is now heading up, but not the Tories.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
I'm struggling to think of anything Rory Stewart did in his nine years in parliament.
Apart that is from giving a very bizarre performance in a Conservative leadership debate.
Yet he has somehow been elevated to the position of the hypothetical Conservative leader who people who have no intention of voting Conservative claim would persuade them to vote Conservative but in reality wouldn't.
He’s the centre left’s idea of a “Good Tory”. I personally have time for the guy but even I know there’s never been a cat in hell’s chance of him being elected by Conservative Members. By the PCP, back in the day, maybe, but not by the wider members.
Mordaunt -19 in the debate. To be honest I’d have scored her net positive so I do wonder again if it’s just another sign the public gave up with the Tories long ago.
About 2.6 years ago to be precise. That's when the ship began sinking after Captain Boris crashed it into some rocks, then Truss drilled a whole in the bottom, Sunak patched it up with some emergency planks, but they've been taking on water constantly since, and about 3 weeks ago he decided to jump on the planks to reopen the hole.
I do think we will come to believe that this election was lost in 2022.
Johnson should have gone after Hartlepool and he'd have won a landslide then. That was the peak and it's been downhill ever since.
Of course, the Tories were never truly popular but SKS for a while was doing terribly. So the Tories had room there to defeat him.
Support for Labour is a mile wide but an inch deep.
They are primarily a rejection mechanism for the present administration- their fundamentals are pretty poor.
I think you are wrong. I think we're about to enter another 3 term period of Labour rule, a period which the Tories may not survive in their current form (although something non-Labour will emerge as an alternative in time).
I could of course be wrong and you will be welcome to say 'I told you so' loudly and often if that proves the case.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
Again, it didn’t work in London, where it actually exists. Not sure it can shift the dial anywhere else where it’s not even been proposed.
Sure, but London has some of the lowest rates of car ownership anywhere in the country. And Hall came a lot closer to Khan than Sunak will to Starmer.
If you were to extrapolate London results and car ownership stats onto the rest of the UK, the Tories would win the election. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS - just an illustration. And I can't show it because I can't find borough level stats.
Is Rotherham a chance for Reform, with no Tory candidate?
Almost certainly.
I think Reform win two seats, Rotherham and Clacton.
No, I’m not getting on the spread bet mentioned yesterday (selling Reform seats at 4.5), which could go quite horribly wrong if the Tories implode in the next four weeks.
I agree, Sandpit.
I was tempted to sell Ref on the spreads too, but you are backing massive odds on, and every time I think the Tories can't implode further, they do.
A mutiny and public withdrawal of support would mean he would have to step down, though. But perhaps the conditions of the election mean a replacement couldn't be confirmed.
I wonder if there any outlier scenarios though, there. Did any previous Tory coronations bypass the party's own internal rules ?
Possibly. Uncharted waters. I can’t think of a precedent.
I know they say this, but what would've changed between now and (say) October? I doubt it would've been better, and Sunak would've made the same unforced errors then as he's been doing now.
- A drop in the interest rate, which is now actively blocked from happening even if the economy needs it, because the BOE say that would be 'intervening in an election' - Another budget, to put a little more money back into peoples' pockets - Government policy on immigration (even just legal immigration not Rwanda) bearing fruit
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
This mob of chancers and losers aren’t Conservative though, so he’s OK.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
She's not been giving a major government job besides Leader of the House in years. I doubt that is purely down to jealousy from the sitting PM.
Jealousy probably is why Liz Truss sidelined Mordaunt as Leader of the House (cf Boris and JRM) but it backfired when HMQ's demise made Penny the most famous sword-carrier in the land, eclipsing Truss herself for most of her seven weeks in office.
Wasn’t the sword-carrying at the Coronation, several months after La Truss had departed the stage?
Erm, maybe, but Mordaunt was front and centre at the Queen's funeral, and possibly at the accession or ceremony of the leaky fountain pens.
She might have been but nobody noticed her then.
Perhaps she hadn't adopted the Poundland imagery at that point.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
Must have been a lot of traitors at those last set of European elections when they got 9%. I know it was unique circumstances, but still, it was a surprise to see so little core support remaining even for that.
As it happened I voted Tory on that occasion, which is probably more than a lot Tory MPs did.
Mordaunt -19 in the debate. To be honest I’d have scored her net positive so I do wonder again if it’s just another sign the public gave up with the Tories long ago.
About 2.6 years ago to be precise. That's when the ship began sinking after Captain Boris crashed it into some rocks, then Truss drilled a whole in the bottom, Sunak patched it up with some emergency planks, but they've been taking on water constantly since, and about 3 weeks ago he decided to jump on the planks to reopen the hole.
I do think we will come to believe that this election was lost in 2022.
Johnson should have gone after Hartlepool and he'd have won a landslide then. That was the peak and it's been downhill ever since.
Of course, the Tories were never truly popular but SKS for a while was doing terribly. So the Tories had room there to defeat him.
Support for Labour is a mile wide but an inch deep.
They are primarily a rejection mechanism for the present administration- their fundamentals are pretty poor.
I don't think there is any evidence for that - there was some polling earlier that showed the reaction of voters to a Tory/Labour victory, and Labour/Tory voters were about equal in their abhorrence.
There is not a single voter in the country who needs a journalist to tell them this. There is not a single poster or lurker on PB who needed you to tell us this, so why did you post it?
What do we think was the strategy? All built around the 2K Lie? Which Penny persisted with to ridicule and disbelief.
Once something like that falls apart so quickly, so cuts through not as a Labour tax rise but as a lie, each mention, billboard and advert is actually hurting the Conservative vote.
Calling a Snappy Lec without a strong campaign ready, without a strong strategy ready, is this the nub of what’s gone wrong - to the disbelief of Tory members and MPs?
I must say for me Horse's post is useful because, taken altogether, it hints that some Tories may be even be thinking of dumping Sunak now.
That would be fairly crazy at this stage, ofcourse, but then again this has been a crazy election period overall, so anything can happen,
Is it possible to dump a sitting PM? I know it might be in theory, but is there time?
He's PM until he can't command a majority in the House, but there is no House at the moment. He could be binned as leader of the Conservatives I suppose, but that would just be farcical. Prime Minister but not leader of the Conservatives (hello Chamberlain and Churchill - but that was in the middle of WWII - perhaps not that daft then given Sunak's National Service pledge).
There isn't time, and any attempt would push them into single figures in the polls.
He can’t be binned as leader of the Conservatives against his will, because there’s no 1922 committee because there’s no MPs.
Yes, it was said Sir Graham Brady fielded a lot of calls from MPs desperate to activate their no confidence letters on the day Rishi called the election, but by then it was too late.
There is not a single voter in the country who needs a journalist to tell them this. There is not a single poster or lurker on PB who needed you to tell us this, so why did you post it?
What do we think was the strategy? All built around the 2K Lie? Which Penny persisted with to ridicule and disbelief.
Once something like that falls apart so quickly, so cuts through not as a Labour tax rise but as a lie, each mention, billboard and advert is actually hurting the Conservative vote.
Calling a Snappy Lec without a strong campaign ready, without a strong strategy ready, is this the nub of what’s gone wrong - to the disbelief of Tory members and MPs?
I must say for me Horse's post is useful because, taken altogether, it hints that some Tories may be even be thinking of dumping Sunak now.
That would be fairly crazy at this stage, ofcourse, but then again this has been a crazy election period overall, so anything can happen,
Is it possible to dump a sitting PM? I know it might be in theory, but is there time?
He's PM until he can't command a majority in the House, but there is no House at the moment. He could be binned as leader of the Conservatives I suppose, but that would just be farcical. Prime Minister but not leader of the Conservatives (hello Chamberlain and Churchill - but that was in the middle of WWII - perhaps not that daft then given Sunak's National Service pledge).
There isn't time, and any attempt would push them into single figures in the polls.
He can’t be binned as leader of the Conservatives against his will, because there’s no 1922 committee because there’s no MPs.
Yes, it was said Sir Graham Brady fielded a lot of calls from MPs desperate to activate their no confidence letters on the day Rishi called the election, but by then it was too late.
That's just another sign of the party's dysfunction. There were clearly a huge number of MP's with no confidence in Sunak. But there was always another excuse why a letter could be put in at a later date. Convinced the election was called because Sunak feared for his leadership. No other explanation makes any sense.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
He's not a Conservative. Boris kicked him out remember?
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
I guarantee you it will *not* be effective. Look at any poll on the key issues worrying voters and car restrictions will not be there. Most people are worried about 1. paying their rent/mortgage and other bills, 2. the state of the health service, 3. other public services, 4. immigration, 5. housing, 6. crime.
The costs of running a car come under items 1 and 3.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
Again, it didn’t work in London, where it actually exists. Not sure it can shift the dial anywhere else where it’s not even been proposed.
You may be a bit more up to date on this than I am. My current list of implemented LEZs (Low Emissions Zones - Down, @Leon !):
All effect commercial vehicles. * Affects non-compliant private cars ** Bans non-compliant private cars. I think.
There's room for shit-stirring there, but most of these have aiui been in for some time and I expect compliance is now high and we are over the hump.
There is still perhaps room for annoyance amongst cabbies, white van men and hauliers.
If anyone has recent data on compliance, I would be interested.
It is also of interest where improved air quality has been registering, as aiui it has in London, which would allow the "but LEZ / ULEZ" arguments to be countered.
SKS must have had one of the most remarkable turnarounds in history (assuming he wins).
In 2021 he was almost as unpopular as Corbyn. I know people say he's got no talent but the Tories imploding doesn't explain the improvement in his ratings in that time.
My strong feeling is that after 2021 he got Blair and Mandelson in.
Everything I've read suggests they're not particularly involved - although obviously Mandelson is trying his best.
Truss and Sunak obviously were not going to promote her any further as a key potential challenger, ofcourse.
That's why I wouldn't personally say her lack of ministerial appointments after that time is necessarily any evidence of anything much, from what I can see there.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Telling all the remainers like Stewar, Hammond, Grieve, Gauke that they shouldn't be Tories any more - another 15 million IQ move from Dom.
That mob? They were even worse than Sunak and co! In fact they were worse.
Stewart oversaw harmful Defra cuts.
Grieve initiated voting ID.
Gauke was behind lots of unnecessary austerity and cruel benefit stopping measures.
Yep, they were proper Tories. Didn't stop Boris chucking them under the Brexit bus though.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
If you do that you’ll never change. I had to abstain in 2019 to tell Labour I wouldn’t vote for them with Corbyn in charge (indeed wouldn’t vote LibDem, from which party I had recently resigned, over the insane Revoke Art 50 policy either) and now…
Mordaunt -19 in the debate. To be honest I’d have scored her net positive so I do wonder again if it’s just another sign the public gave up with the Tories long ago.
I think so. I thought she put in an average performance but then she had very little to work with.
Jeepers, cut her some slack.
How would you like to have to defend the PM the day after he'd offended his core constituency?
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Telling all the remainers like Stewar, Hammond, Grieve, Gauke that they shouldn't be Tories any more - another 15 million IQ move from Dom.
That mob? They were even worse than Sunak and co! In fact they were worse.
Stewart oversaw harmful Defra cuts.
Grieve initiated voting ID.
Gauke was behind lots of unnecessary austerity and cruel benefit stopping measures.
Yep, they were proper Tories. Didn't stop Boris chucking them under the Brexit bus though.
Exactly. Nobody said they were Novara watchers. Just Tories turned into Untories. Which made a lot of sense in the very short term.
David Davis was cosplaying Hezza last night with his 'the feedback on the doorsteps is not like the polls!' Schtick. However, I do wonder how much of the Change/Labour vote is actually keen enough to bother, especially as it looks a done and dusted deal. Change is all SKS and Labour offer, there no policy hook, no idealogical hook. I think the more it looks done, the more a lot peel away to 'meh' or George or Reform whereas the remaining Tories will just trudge along and vote Tory Big gap elections always seem to be less so on the day
You've argued for a while that the Workers Party will do well, but look how few candidates they've managed to nominate, contrary to their boasting they'd stand in every constituency.
After the nominations came out I revised the 750,000 votes (predicated on 500 standing) to 225,000 (about 0.6%). GG has set a target of 200,000 votes and his reelection as minimum target I believe. I see no reason to alter those predictions from here on in. They had 240 or prospectives earlier in the week, I'm guessing moneys too tight to mention. They will easily outperform the likes of TUSC and SDP. We will see.
Part of my point as to why 750k was unlikely, when we discussed the matter at the time, was because I never believed they would manage to nominate so many. I told you so.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
Again, it didn’t work in London, where it actually exists. Not sure it can shift the dial anywhere else where it’s not even been proposed.
You may be a bit more up to date on this than I am. My current list of implemented LEZs (Low Emissions Zones - Down, @Leon !):
All effect commercial vehicles. * Affects non-compliant private cars ** Bans non-compliant private cars. I think.
There's room for shit-stirring there, but most of these have aiui been in for some time and I expect compliance is now high and we are over the hump.
There is still perhaps room for annoyance amongst cabbies, white van men and hauliers.
If anyone has recent data on compliance, I would be interested.
It is also of interest where improved air quality has been registering, as aiui it has in London, which would allow the "but LEZ / ULEZ" arguments to be countered.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
I guarantee you it will *not* be effective. Look at any poll on the key issues worrying voters and car restrictions will not be there. Most people are worried about 1. paying their rent/mortgage and other bills, 2. the state of the health service, 3. other public services, 4. immigration, 5. housing, 6. crime.
The costs of running a car come under items 1 and 3.
But only 5-10% of cars are affected, reducing all the time.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
He's not a Conservative. Boris kicked him out remember?
I do wonder if absent some really Big Thing, this election campaign is over? We have upcoming football and tennis and frankly, any other distraction you can take from politics before we vote.
I thought you were getting really good feedback on the doorstep, though?
Yes, but when the PM is blasting away at his own feet with large calibre weaponry, it is not helpful!
I just think voters generally have tuned out.
I've used you as an arbiter so far of "the other side". You gave me some confidence it might still be a tighter result than expected.
Are you therefore conceding that the Tories are going to lose too? By how much do you think?
I still think that Labour might struggle to break 40. My take was 39% - I think Farage will peel a chunk of votes from Labour on the day.
But my take of the Tories on 33%? That is looking well out of reach. Rishi has proved to be a very poor campaigner. The people around him seem to be clueless.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
If you do that you’ll never change. I had to abstain in 2019 to tell Labour I wouldn’t vote for them with Corbyn in charge (indeed wouldn’t vote LibDem, from which party I had recently resigned, over the insane Revoke Art 50 policy either) and now…
Yes, it's the 'My mother, right or wrong' argument'.
Actually, thinking of my own mother, I was against her right or wrong, but you get my point.
A mutiny and public withdrawal of support would mean he would have to step down, though. But perhaps the conditions of the election mean a replacement couldn't be confirmed.
I wonder if there any outlier scenarios though, there. Did any previous Tory coronations bypass the party's own internal rules ?
Possibly. Uncharted waters. I can’t think of a precedent.
I guess he could notionally be PM for the next 4 weeks while someone else fronted the Tory campaign and campaigned to replace him. At the end of the day it’s a club so could just pick a leader.
But there is no natural successor is there? It couldn’t be a caretaker because of the obvious attacks and it would need to be someone standing to be an MP.
A former PM. Someone who knows what a photo op is and would have been all over the Normandy event. Someone with a clear strategy.
Is Rotherham a chance for Reform, with no Tory candidate?
Almost certainly.
I think Reform win two seats, Rotherham and Clacton.
No, I’m not getting on the spread bet mentioned yesterday (selling Reform seats at 4.5), which could go quite horribly wrong if the Tories implode in the next four weeks.
I agree, Sandpit.
I was tempted to sell Ref on the spreads too, but you are backing massive odds on, and every time I think the Tories can't implode further, they do.
No bet is no problem.
Yes, I only ever once played spread seats markets, buying the Tories in 2017, and lost my arse to the tune of a bag of sand.
Selling Reform seats is that on steroids, there’s an awful lot of downside compared to the potential upside. Some poor bugger will have sold 1.5 at a grand a seat, before Farage’s announcement, and if they win 50 he’s in all sorts of trouble.
A mutiny and public withdrawal of support would mean he would have to step down, though. But perhaps the conditions of the election mean a replacement couldn't be confirmed.
I wonder if there any outlier scenarios though, there. Did any previous Tory coronations bypass the party's own internal rules ?
Possibly. Uncharted waters. I can’t think of a precedent.
I guess he could notionally be PM for the next 4 weeks while someone else fronted the Tory campaign and campaigned to replace him. At the end of the day it’s a club so could just pick a leader.
But there is no natural successor is there? It couldn’t be a caretaker because of the obvious attacks and it would need to be someone standing to be an MP.
A former PM. Someone who knows what a photo op is and would have been all over the Normandy event. Someone with a clear strategy.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
There's a question that any rational hardcore supporter of a political party should ask themselves: where is their personal limit?
In your case, what 'conservative' policies could a Conservative party propose that meant you could not vote for them? If they proposed deportation, not just for illegal immigrants, but also foreign-born citizens? How about if they proposed to end the NHS by fully privatising it? Murder of first-borns?
According to the attitude in your post, not supporting the Conservative Party if they enacted, or even proposed, such things would be 'treason'.
The same thing applies for the other parties as well: e.g. if Labour decided to privatise all nationalised industries.
Rory Stewart did not leave the Conservative Party. The Conservative Party left him.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
She's not been giving a major government job besides Leader of the House in years. I doubt that is purely down to jealousy from the sitting PM.
Jealousy probably is why Liz Truss sidelined Mordaunt as Leader of the House (cf Boris and JRM) but it backfired when HMQ's demise made Penny the most famous sword-carrier in the land, eclipsing Truss herself for most of her seven weeks in office.
Wasn’t the sword-carrying at the Coronation, several months after La Truss had departed the stage?
You're definitely correct about the sword, although less correct about Truss departing the stage.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
He's not a Conservative. Boris kicked him out remember?
He wanted out.
Perhaps understandably.
Boris kicked nobody out of the party rather the whip was removed from them.
Many of who had it restored and most of whom are still Conservative members:
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Telling all the remainers like Stewar, Hammond, Grieve, Gauke that they shouldn't be Tories any more - another 15 million IQ move from Dom.
That mob? They were even worse than Sunak and co! In fact they were worse.
Stewart oversaw harmful Defra cuts.
Grieve initiated voting ID.
Gauke was behind lots of unnecessary austerity and cruel benefit stopping measures.
Yep, they were proper Tories. Didn't stop Boris chucking them under the Brexit bus though.
If that’s a “proper Tory” then it’s no wonder no one likes them…
Honestly. There’s nothing remotely inspirational about the likes of Stewart, Gauke, and Hammond. Just a streak of cruelty as they enjoy cutting benefits.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
Again, it didn’t work in London, where it actually exists. Not sure it can shift the dial anywhere else where it’s not even been proposed.
You may be a bit more up to date on this than I am. My current list of implemented LEZs (Low Emissions Zones - Down, @Leon !):
All effect commercial vehicles. * Affects non-compliant private cars ** Bans non-compliant private cars. I think.
There's room for shit-stirring there, but most of these have aiui been in for some time and I expect compliance is now high and we are over the hump.
There is still perhaps room for annoyance amongst cabbies, white van men and hauliers.
If anyone has recent data on compliance, I would be interested.
It is also of interest where improved air quality has been registering, as aiui it has in London, which would allow the "but LEZ / ULEZ" arguments to be countered.
Dundee, Aberdeen and Edinburgh all went live this week, which in the latter case is effing irritating because I'd assumed Edinburgh started at the same time as Glasgow and I've been skirting the centre for the last 9 months.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
I guarantee you it will *not* be effective. Look at any poll on the key issues worrying voters and car restrictions will not be there. Most people are worried about 1. paying their rent/mortgage and other bills, 2. the state of the health service, 3. other public services, 4. immigration, 5. housing, 6. crime.
The costs of running a car come under items 1 and 3.
But only 5-10% of cars are affected, reducing all the time.
Indeed, but those 5-10% of cars are run by some of the poorest people, who often rely on their car for minimum-wage shiftwork, and the suspicion (among way more than those directly affected) is that the scope of these schemes will be expanded once the infrastructure is in place.
Mordaunt -19 in the debate. To be honest I’d have scored her net positive so I do wonder again if it’s just another sign the public gave up with the Tories long ago.
About 2.6 years ago to be precise. That's when the ship began sinking after Captain Boris crashed it into some rocks, then Truss drilled a whole in the bottom, Sunak patched it up with some emergency planks, but they've been taking on water constantly since, and about 3 weeks ago he decided to jump on the planks to reopen the hole.
I do think we will come to believe that this election was lost in 2022.
Johnson should have gone after Hartlepool and he'd have won a landslide then. That was the peak and it's been downhill ever since.
Of course, the Tories were never truly popular but SKS for a while was doing terribly. So the Tories had room there to defeat him.
Support for Labour is a mile wide but an inch deep.
They are primarily a rejection mechanism for the present administration- their fundamentals are pretty poor.
I think you are wrong. I think we're about to enter another 3 term period of Labour rule, a period which the Tories may not survive in their current form (although something non-Labour will emerge as an alternative in time).
I could of course be wrong and you will be welcome to say 'I told you so' loudly and often if that proves the case.
I think I'm right. But I won't say 'I told you you so' because that'll be annoying for you to hear and I don't particularly care about being seen to be right.
But, anyone who automatically assumes 2-3 terms or 10-15 years minimum is simply projecting present day support wildly into the future and assuming that nothing will change and everything will stay the same.
That's not how it works, nor what the fundamentals show, so it essentially demonstrates a failure of imagination.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
I'm struggling to think of anything Rory Stewart did in his nine years in parliament.
Apart that is from giving a very bizarre performance in a Conservative leadership debate.
Yet he has somehow been elevated to the position of the hypothetical Conservative leader who people who have no intention of voting Conservative claim would persuade them to vote Conservative but in reality wouldn't.
He’s the centre left’s idea of a “Good Tory”. I personally have time for the guy but even I know there’s never been a cat in hell’s chance of him being elected by Conservative Members. By the PCP, back in the day, maybe, but not by the wider members.
Stewart represents a type of Tory that is missing from the modern Tory party: Patriotic, aristocratic, details oriented, well travelled, worldly and traditionalist (but not backward looking). There were a lot of caricatures of him as Lawrence of Arabia smoking a hookah which I think played well for him. He's quite profoundly British but in the outward looking way that characterised Churchill or Heath. That's quite attractive to a lot of centrist types.
I do wonder if absent some really Big Thing, this election campaign is over? We have upcoming football and tennis and frankly, any other distraction you can take from politics before we vote.
I thought you were getting really good feedback on the doorstep, though?
Yes, but when the PM is blasting away at his own feet with large calibre weaponry, it is not helpful!
I just think voters generally have tuned out.
I've used you as an arbiter so far of "the other side". You gave me some confidence it might still be a tighter result than expected.
Are you therefore conceding that the Tories are going to lose too? By how much do you think?
I still think that Labour might struggle to break 40. My take was 39% - I think Farage will peel a chunk of votes from Labour on the day.
But my take of the Tories on 33%? That is looking well out of reach. Rishi has proved to be a very poor campaigner. The people around him seem to be clueless.
Yup. I think my prediction was something like 39/34 and a “reverse 2010”.
I may have slightly miscalculated that Tory score.
A mutiny and public withdrawal of support would mean he would have to step down, though. But perhaps the conditions of the election mean a replacement couldn't be confirmed.
I wonder if there any outlier scenarios though, there. Did any previous Tory coronations bypass the party's own internal rules ?
Possibly. Uncharted waters. I can’t think of a precedent.
I guess he could notionally be PM for the next 4 weeks while someone else fronted the Tory campaign and campaigned to replace him. At the end of the day it’s a club so could just pick a leader.
But there is no natural successor is there? It couldn’t be a caretaker because of the obvious attacks and it would need to be someone standing to be an MP.
A former PM. Someone who knows what a photo op is and would have been all over the Normandy event. Someone with a clear strategy.
I don't think the hectoring style was her comformt zone yesterday. She could turn herself into a sort of slightly more military Jacinda Ardern, appealing to the centre.
Penny would be legendary if she had
a) A moderately right wing stance, around the Leadsom/Geoffrey Cox marker - she's done herself in with the squelchy wokery, which is dating badly
b) Someone to do all the work for her. She's more of a front person it seems than a grafter. Which is fine - we've seen with Rishi where spreadsheets get you. We can't all be Thatcher, but you do need the right team around you.
Sadly, she doesn't.
But she does look a little like Catherine Deneuve, which is good enough for some of us of a certain age.
She was bob-on with the snappy-leccy, so a big Conny-winny is not out of the question.
Where did this horrible use of ‘language’ come from? Apart from the fact that I can’t even understand most of it, it’s beyond irritating. I makes the poster sound like a playschool child.
According to Sam Freedman, he's hearing resources for the Tories are starting to move 'safer' to places like Huntingdon. I suspect they're drawing the fire break at 20,000 majority (90 to 95 seats) and aim for say 50 more above that (Scotland, London, split opposition)
I’d always planned to sell Reform bets after Farage’s first debate - maybe once D-Day gate has taken effect in the polls. A big surge of hype for Reform/Farage should see their odds tumble further for the next few days.
Do we think:
A. The red meat like stamp duty and ULEZ scrapping in the Tory manifesto will boost the Tories back up next week - this is the shortest that Reform odds will get. Best to sell now.
OR
B. Crossover might hold a bit longer - better to keep it going for a bit, see how it goes, and sell Reform bets closer to polling day
OR
C. Hold until the end for the hopes of long odds payouts - MRPs are too hard to guess and the Canada ‘93 wipeout might actually happen.
I have no skin in this game but I reckon you ought to C it through. Every time we think the Tories have hit the bottom they find another hole to step into.
I do wonder if absent some really Big Thing, this election campaign is over? We have upcoming football and tennis and frankly, any other distraction you can take from politics before we vote.
I thought you were getting really good feedback on the doorstep, though?
Yes, but when the PM is blasting away at his own feet with large calibre weaponry, it is not helpful!
I just think voters generally have tuned out.
I've used you as an arbiter so far of "the other side". You gave me some confidence it might still be a tighter result than expected.
Are you therefore conceding that the Tories are going to lose too? By how much do you think?
I still think that Labour might struggle to break 40. My take was 39% - I think Farage will peel a chunk of votes from Labour on the day.
But my take of the Tories on 33%? That is looking well out of reach. Rishi has proved to be a very poor campaigner. The people around him seem to be clueless.
Yeah, he hasn't just shat the bed. He's fired explosive diarrhea into it, repeatedly.
Just zero political instincts. Not just those around him - apparently he makes a lot of the decisions himself.
According to Sam Freedman, he's hearing resources for the Tories are starting to move 'safer' to places like Huntingdon. I suspect they're drawing the fire break at 20,000 majority (90 to 95 seats) and aim for say 50 more above that (Scotland, London, split opposition)
150 would be a little worse than 1997, which right now would be a good result.
ULEZ - highly effective. Will scare the crap out of poorer people in rural areas who depend on their cars and keep old bangers going for decades. People where I grew up are deeply worried about this kind of thing, and equate it with more radical policies like taxing per mile (which is IMO a stupid idea, the inverse of what we should be doing)
20mph - mixed. A large chunk of voters get really wound up by these. But always in a local minority, and in local politics this could cause real issues. Incumbency is really the only thing going for some Tory candidates, and if the perception is overturning a 20mph limit outside a primary school to please some Audi drivers... Tory to Reform switchers only I think.
LTNs - will appeal to the tin hatters (Reform again). That's about it - too complicated for most voters. Could be weaponised by Labour by working out the total cost of ripping out every LTN in the country - billions, considering all modern housing estates are LTNs.
The whole point of the ULEZ is that it's a Zone - it won't be a zone if it's the whole country. And there is no way you could implement it in the countryside for the obvious reason that everyone needs a car...
Doesn't matter - the politics of ULEZ are just really difficult anywhere outside London, Edinburgh, Bristol and so on. I should correct myself though - it's not just the few people who actually live in rural areas (20%), but everyone is provincial towns like say Peterborough.
Surely the pollution levels are pretty much inversely related to the areas where you most need a car?
Yes, that's my point.
If the Tories can bang on about ULEZ for 3 weeks and claim Labour (and Khan) are coming for the rest of the country, it will be effective. The weirdest thing is otherwise, Sunak is very keen on reducing lung disease if you consider his smoking ban. Surprised no one has pestered him on that.
(I realise that I am starting to sound like Moonrabbit... time will tell)
I guarantee you it will *not* be effective. Look at any poll on the key issues worrying voters and car restrictions will not be there. Most people are worried about 1. paying their rent/mortgage and other bills, 2. the state of the health service, 3. other public services, 4. immigration, 5. housing, 6. crime.
The costs of running a car come under items 1 and 3.
But only 5-10% of cars are affected, reducing all the time.
Oh come on! Do you really believe they have installed all of those cameras for a dwindling no.of vehicles. Road pricing or inclusion of all petrol/diesel cars will be in before the next election.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
She's not been giving a major government job besides Leader of the House in years. I doubt that is purely down to jealousy from the sitting PM.
Jealousy probably is why Liz Truss sidelined Mordaunt as Leader of the House (cf Boris and JRM) but it backfired when HMQ's demise made Penny the most famous sword-carrier in the land, eclipsing Truss herself for most of her seven weeks in office.
Wasn’t the sword-carrying at the Coronation, several months after La Truss had departed the stage?
Erm, maybe, but Mordaunt was front and centre at the Queen's funeral, and possibly at the accession or ceremony of the leaky fountain pens.
Yes, she was at the accession ceremonies as well, in the same role but without the sword.
A week earlier, and it would have been Jacob in that role. To be fair to him, he’d have also done it well.
I don't think the hectoring style was her comformt zone yesterday. She could turn herself into a sort of slightly more military Jacinda Ardern, appealing to the centre.
Penny would be legendary if she had
a) A moderately right wing stance, around the Leadsom/Geoffrey Cox marker - she's done herself in with the squelchy wokery, which is dating badly
b) Someone to do all the work for her. She's more of a front person it seems than a grafter. Which is fine - we've seen with Rishi where spreadsheets get you. We can't all be Thatcher, but you do need the right team around you.
Sadly, she doesn't.
But she does look a little like Catherine Deneuve, which is good enough for some of us of a certain age.
She was bob-on with the snappy-leccy, so a big Conny-winny is not out of the question.
Where did this horrible use of ‘language’ come from? Apart from the fact that I can’t even understand most of it, it’s beyond irritating. I makes the poster sound like a playschool child.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
If you do that you’ll never change. I had to abstain in 2019 to tell Labour I wouldn’t vote for them with Corbyn in charge (indeed wouldn’t vote LibDem, from which party I had recently resigned, over the insane Revoke Art 50 policy either) and now…
I'm not a "voter", I'm a lifelong party member and activist who's invested a lot into the party.
So you back it. Your team, friends and colleagues. And influence from the inside wherever you can.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
I'm struggling to think of anything Rory Stewart did in his nine years in parliament.
Apart that is from giving a very bizarre performance in a Conservative leadership debate.
Yet he has somehow been elevated to the position of the hypothetical Conservative leader who people who have no intention of voting Conservative claim would persuade them to vote Conservative but in reality wouldn't.
He’s the centre left’s idea of a “Good Tory”. I personally have time for the guy but even I know there’s never been a cat in hell’s chance of him being elected by Conservative Members. By the PCP, back in the day, maybe, but not by the wider members.
Stewart represents a type of Tory that is missing from the modern Tory party: Patriotic, aristocratic, details oriented, well travelled, worldly and traditionalist (but not backward looking). There were a lot of caricatures of him as Lawrence of Arabia smoking a hookah which I think played well for him. He's quite profoundly British but in the outward looking way that characterised Churchill or Heath. That's quite attractive to a lot of centrist types.
Nah, he’s a chancer. Joined the party in the ascendency.
There is not a single voter in the country who needs a journalist to tell them this. There is not a single poster or lurker on PB who needed you to tell us this, so why did you post it?
What do we think was the strategy? All built around the 2K Lie? Which Penny persisted with to ridicule and disbelief.
Once something like that falls apart so quickly, so cuts through not as a Labour tax rise but as a lie, each mention, billboard and advert is actually hurting the Conservative vote.
Calling a Snappy Lec without a strong campaign ready, without a strong strategy ready, is this the nub of what’s gone wrong - to the disbelief of Tory members and MPs?
I must say for me Horse's post is useful because, taken altogether, it hints that some Tories may be even be thinking of dumping Sunak now.
That would be fairly crazy at this stage, ofcourse, but then again this has been a crazy election period overall, so anything can happen,
Is it possible to dump a sitting PM? I know it might be in theory, but is there time?
He's PM until he can't command a majority in the House, but there is no House at the moment. He could be binned as leader of the Conservatives I suppose, but that would just be farcical. Prime Minister but not leader of the Conservatives (hello Chamberlain and Churchill - but that was in the middle of WWII - perhaps not that daft then given Sunak's National Service pledge).
There isn't time, and any attempt would push them into single figures in the polls.
He can’t be binned as leader of the Conservatives against his will, because there’s no 1922 committee because there’s no MPs.
Yes, it was said Sir Graham Brady fielded a lot of calls from MPs desperate to activate their no confidence letters on the day Rishi called the election, but by then it was too late.
There is not a single voter in the country who needs a journalist to tell them this. There is not a single poster or lurker on PB who needed you to tell us this, so why did you post it?
What do we think was the strategy? All built around the 2K Lie? Which Penny persisted with to ridicule and disbelief.
Once something like that falls apart so quickly, so cuts through not as a Labour tax rise but as a lie, each mention, billboard and advert is actually hurting the Conservative vote.
Calling a Snappy Lec without a strong campaign ready, without a strong strategy ready, is this the nub of what’s gone wrong - to the disbelief of Tory members and MPs?
I must say for me Horse's post is useful because, taken altogether, it hints that some Tories may be even be thinking of dumping Sunak now.
That would be fairly crazy at this stage, ofcourse, but then again this has been a crazy election period overall, so anything can happen,
Is it possible to dump a sitting PM? I know it might be in theory, but is there time?
He's PM until he can't command a majority in the House, but there is no House at the moment. He could be binned as leader of the Conservatives I suppose, but that would just be farcical. Prime Minister but not leader of the Conservatives (hello Chamberlain and Churchill - but that was in the middle of WWII - perhaps not that daft then given Sunak's National Service pledge).
There isn't time, and any attempt would push them into single figures in the polls.
He can’t be binned as leader of the Conservatives against his will, because there’s no 1922 committee because there’s no MPs.
Yes, it was said Sir Graham Brady fielded a lot of calls from MPs desperate to activate their no confidence letters on the day Rishi called the election, but by then it was too late.
That's just another sign of the party's dysfunction. There were clearly a huge number of MP's with no confidence in Sunak. But there was always another excuse why a letter could be put in at a later date. Convinced the election was called because Sunak feared for his leadership. No other explanation makes any sense.
It may be that he and other key figures in the Party wanted to ensure that the post-GE Parliamentary Party was more representative of their views and would contain fewer nutters.
This too makes sense, although if true, it may be backfiring.
Mordaunt reminds me of the hype Sunak had. She's popular because she's not him but she seems to have very little actual talent or ideas. She was meh during the debate.
Now if the Tories had Rory Stewart, they'd be steam rolling Labour. But they kicked him out of the party and said bye bye to voters like me - who I am sure right now they'd love to have. That would probably produce them a 2015 majority.
Danny Finkelstein was right, the Johnson strategy long term results only in losing.
Rory is voting Lib Dem at this election he has said.
Treason. If you're a Conservative you back your side even when it's fucking pouring outside.
Grr.
He's not a Conservative. Boris kicked him out remember?
I couldn't care less what Boris did.
It's up to him what he identifies as and the decisions he makes.
Comments
Like those who posted more than two years ago, that Thangham Debbenaire was going to lose her seat to a green - what a long range call that was.
As a Synesthete, Stodge can “smell” things in polling the rest of us can’t.
Are you therefore conceding that the Tories are going to lose too? By how much do you think?
And gods forbid if the PM forgets the name of a constituency or local candidate.
Not quite bold enough thinking though. Species, planets, form realms and dimension changes need to be in there.
On which point, where's the Saturday troll?
They are primarily a rejection mechanism for the present administration- their fundamentals are pretty poor.
Point 2: Interesting!
In 2021 he was almost as unpopular as Corbyn. I know people say he's got no talent but the Tories imploding doesn't explain the improvement in his ratings in that time.
My strong feeling is that after 2021 he got Blair and Mandelson in.
What’s our strategy?
I’d always planned to sell Reform bets after Farage’s first debate - maybe once D-Day gate has taken effect in the polls. A big surge of hype for Reform/Farage should see their odds tumble further for the next few days.
Do we think:
A. The red meat like stamp duty and ULEZ scrapping in the Tory manifesto will boost the Tories back up next week - this is the shortest that Reform odds will get. Best to sell now.
OR
B. Crossover might hold a bit longer - better to keep it going for a bit, see how it goes, and sell Reform bets closer to polling day
OR
C. Hold until the end for the hopes of long odds payouts - MRPs are too hard to guess and the Canada ‘93 wipeout might actually happen.
Folk have stopped listening. And even when they do, they automatically think lie.
It becomes apparent in debate where her appearance and delivery is initially good but as soon as she gets off her prepared position, she can't think on her feet and embarrasses herself.
That's certainly true in my constituency. Their representative is,I am sure, a sweet kid, but he'll be doing well to save his deposit.
I think it just encapsulates everyone's concerns about Sunak perfectly, and that's why it's resonated.
And the opposition to ULEZ stems from increased costs for low income people running old cars, so ties in with your point 1.
Apart that is from giving a very bizarre performance in a Conservative leadership debate.
Yet he has somehow been elevated to the position of the hypothetical Conservative leader who people who have no intention of voting Conservative claim would persuade them to vote Conservative but in reality wouldn't.
It's technically 609 I've realised, they have withdrawn support from Horsham and Leeds/Pudsey candidates
Sunak said some time ago the GE would be H2, but in recent months he's got despondent about the whole PM/election thing so he's taken the earliest H2 opportunity he could. The sooner it's all over and he can jet off to California, the better for him (and us, tbf).
I wonder if there any outlier scenarios though, there. Did any previous Tory coronations bypass the party's own internal rules on leadership elections ?
North East (11.3%)
City & East (9.7%)
West Central (5.1%)
Greenwich (4.9%)
Smallest/negative
Bexley & Bromley (0%)
Brent & Harrow (-0.5%)
Croydon and Sutton (-0.3%)
Ealing & Hillingdon (0.7%)
Outer London was significantly worse for Khan. You could attribute that to different things, but I see no reason to assume the ULEZ wasn't a meaningful part of it.
Stewart oversaw harmful Defra cuts.
Grieve initiated voting ID.
Gauke was behind lots of unnecessary austerity and cruel benefit stopping measures.
However, has there been any research/past polling, to suggest that people are more likely to reluctantly trudge out and vote for the losers in an election, than go and vote for the likely winners?
I've been out and about on multiple election days, and it always felt like the opposite was more likely.
Pretty sure the latest polls have also said that Labour's "definite to vote" is now heading up, but not the Tories.
Grr.
I could of course be wrong and you will be welcome to say 'I told you so' loudly and often if that proves the case.
If you were to extrapolate London results and car ownership stats onto the rest of the UK, the Tories would win the election. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS - just an illustration. And I can't show it because I can't find borough level stats.
I was tempted to sell Ref on the spreads too, but you are backing massive odds on, and every time I think the Tories can't implode further, they do.
No bet is no problem.
- Another budget, to put a little more money back into peoples' pockets
- Government policy on immigration (even just legal immigration not Rwanda) bearing fruit
Perhaps she hadn't adopted the Poundland imagery at that point.
As it happened I voted Tory on that occasion, which is probably more than a lot Tory MPs did.
There were clearly a huge number of MP's with no confidence in Sunak. But there was always another excuse why a letter could be put in at a later date.
Convinced the election was called because Sunak feared for his leadership.
No other explanation makes any sense.
Bath
Bradford
Brum *
Bristol *
Glasgow **
London *
Newcastle / Gateshead
Portsmouth
Sheffield
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/emissions/clean-air-zones/
All effect commercial vehicles.
* Affects non-compliant private cars
** Bans non-compliant private cars. I think.
There's room for shit-stirring there, but most of these have aiui been in for some time and I expect compliance is now high and we are over the hump.
There is still perhaps room for annoyance amongst cabbies, white van men and hauliers.
If anyone has recent data on compliance, I would be interested.
It is also of interest where improved air quality has been registering, as aiui it has in London, which would allow the "but LEZ / ULEZ" arguments to be countered.
That's why I wouldn't personally say her lack of ministerial appointments after that time is necessarily any evidence of anything much, from what I can see there.
How would you like to have to defend the PM the day after he'd offended his core constituency?
Oh, you mean Stewart.
But my take of the Tories on 33%? That is looking well out of reach. Rishi has proved to be a very poor campaigner. The people around him seem to be clueless.
Actually, thinking of my own mother, I was against her right or wrong, but you get my point.
But there is no natural successor is there? It couldn’t be a caretaker because of the obvious attacks and it would need to be someone standing to be an MP.
A former PM. Someone who knows what a photo op is and would have been all over the Normandy event. Someone with a clear strategy.
Liz Truss reborn!
If you don’t call out his first post, Horse Bat will fill the thread with his drivel.
Selling Reform seats is that on steroids, there’s an awful lot of downside compared to the potential upside. Some poor bugger will have sold 1.5 at a grand a seat, before Farage’s announcement, and if they win 50 he’s in all sorts of trouble.
Isn’t that what’s wrong with Labour?
In your case, what 'conservative' policies could a Conservative party propose that meant you could not vote for them? If they proposed deportation, not just for illegal immigrants, but also foreign-born citizens? How about if they proposed to end the NHS by fully privatising it? Murder of first-borns?
According to the attitude in your post, not supporting the Conservative Party if they enacted, or even proposed, such things would be 'treason'.
The same thing applies for the other parties as well: e.g. if Labour decided to privatise all nationalised industries.
Rory Stewart did not leave the Conservative Party. The Conservative Party left him.
Perhaps understandably.
Boris kicked nobody out of the party rather the whip was removed from them.
Many of who had it restored and most of whom are still Conservative members:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_suspension_of_rebel_Conservative_MPs
Honestly. There’s nothing remotely inspirational about the likes of Stewart, Gauke, and Hammond. Just a streak of cruelty as they enjoy cutting benefits.
But, anyone who automatically assumes 2-3 terms or 10-15 years minimum is simply projecting present day support wildly into the future and assuming that nothing will change and everything will stay the same.
That's not how it works, nor what the fundamentals show, so it essentially demonstrates a failure of imagination.
I may have slightly miscalculated that Tory score.
Horse is alright. He has his flaws. So do we all.
DYOR
Did any or several of them involve a replacement without a vote ? Is this possible according to Tory Party rules ?
Just zero political instincts. Not just those around him - apparently he makes a lot of the decisions himself.
Do you really believe they have installed all of those cameras for a dwindling no.of vehicles. Road pricing or inclusion of all petrol/diesel cars will be in before the next election.
A week earlier, and it would have been Jacob in that role. To be fair to him, he’d have also done it well.
So you back it. Your team, friends and colleagues. And influence from the inside wherever you can.
This too makes sense, although if true, it may be backfiring.
It's up to him what he identifies as and the decisions he makes.
No time for turncoats.