My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
Anyway seeing as it’s de rigeur to quote your travels I shall tell you where I am.
I’m in a microbrewery in the town of Cheb in the Czech Republic, a few kilometres from the German border. Once a Germanic town, prior to the Beneš expulsions.
Funnily whilst much of the ČR feels pretty prosperous these days, Cheb feels a bit left behind. Something of a funnel for migrants moving East towards Germany.
But the beer is good.
East towards Germany from the Czech Republic?
Wouldn't Czechs going East end up in Slovakia or Poland? To go to Germany you'd surely go West?
Yes, had a brain freeze and have edited it. Cheb is about as far west as you can go in the ČR. West takes you to Nürnberg and München.
Earlier I paid a brief visit to Marianské Lazně. Famous for being the setting of Last Year at Marienbad.
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
The next version of the Conservative party will be clear populist right, and as it will be more coherent than the current version it will be a bit more successful. But the age profile is horrible still and demographics are against them. They could win if Labour do badly, but probably won't.
I think the version after that in the mid 2030s is one that could be more appealing and successful, embracing some of the different conservative values of todays younger generations, who after all, study harder, eat healthier, drink less, smoke less, and care about the planet more than my generation or the ones above me do. Those sound like conservative instincts to me, and I can see a reborn very different Conservative party doing very well with todays youngsters and some of the floating voters by then when people will be tired with Labour. Sadly the populist right period first is necessary to eventually get rid of it.
What you're assuming there, though, is that both the demographic profile and the voting habits of those who are younger stay static.
Look at what's happening in Europe, and, indeed, some early indicators of how views of young men in particular are changing here.
That's demonstrably not the case. And I wouldn't be placing any long-term reliance on it.
Probably not wise of Starmer to attack the Corbyn manifesto today, its a free hit for journos Thursday that he backed it to the hilt in 2019 and that, in itself, feeds a favourite Sunak attack line. It of course makes no difference to the result but its the sort of laziness that big leads invite.
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
We may well not like what we get, but we damn sure are certain we hate what we've got now.
Then, it demonstrates nothing more than a failure of imagination.
If the Conservatives disappear for a hard-right alternative, with a serious prospect of winning power, then belated "oh shits" and "what have we done?" will be just that.
Too late.
I'm genuinely interested in what you think the current Tory party offer the country at the minute. Forget Labour getting a stonking majority or what they might do in office, why should I vote Tory on July 4th?
People are still exceeding the daily photo allowance.
If this continues everybody's ability to post photos will be revoked.
It is your call.
So far, WilliamGlenn, Heathener, and KJH have exceeded their quota today.
I'm hearing in the tones of the teacher who told us that a small minority were spoiling it for the rest of us.
"Do you want us to just do Maths today, and not have a chance to enjoy the sunshine outside ? Because that's what'll happen."
There's an alternative.
I can add a script that automatically bans people if they exceed the daily quota.
Do it!
It’s not hard to remember - one photo a day. Its actually quite a good discipline and one I’ve stuck to throughout my PB career anyway
But seriously. You don’t need the grief as you recuperate from a nasty op - make it automatic. Good idea
And if a poster needs to offer visual proof of something (like my £10 given to the Ukrainian lady for @Sandpit) and you’ve used up your quota then simply link to an image hosting website like Imgur
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
We may well not like what we get, but we damn sure are certain we hate what we've got now.
Then, it demonstrates nothing more than a failure of imagination.
If the Conservatives disappear for a hard-right alternative, with a serious prospect of winning power, then belated "oh shits" and "what have we done?" will be just that.
Too late.
I'm genuinely interested in what you think the current Tory party offer the country at the minute. Forget Labour getting a stonking majority or what they might do in office, why should I vote Tory on July 4th?
Imagine if Labour stays on 38 and Tories start eating up Reform.
Unlikely with so much hate for Sunak, but @leon is right, if we got to 38/32 we’d all be debating if Labour could cling on for a majority.
Can only happen if loads of grumpy Reform voters suddenly decide to back Sunak as lesser of two evils, rather than sticking to their guns, or sitting on their hands, or breaking for Labour in significant numbers.
I came into this expecting the Tory vote to firm up significantly, as the fact that voters now had to actually pick a Government rather than complain/emote came into view, but there's no sign of swing back so far - and that includes among the vital elderly vote.
I would suggest the only mechanism is if something cuts through about Labour that they can be galvanised to want to STOP. Sufficiently galvanised they overlook Sunak.
Given Labour’s message discipline so far, that seems unlikely.
Yes. The Ming Vase Marathon reaches it's conclusion with the manifesto launch on Thursday, I think. If that goes according to plan then all Sir Keir has to do is get to polling day without being filmed either throwing a sack of live puppies into the Thames or anywhere with a conspicuous EU flag in the background, and he's Prime Minister. Though actually, given the popularity of the outgoing administration, he might well survive even those.
I am having visions now of Keir Starmer, wrapped in a huge EU flag, throwing a burning sack of live puppies into the Thames, whilst a chorus of trans women sing the Ode to Joy and the shadow cabinet march behind him, over a carpet made of Union Jacks and photos of the late Queen, whilst waving portraits of Marx and Stalin. That might - just - get us to a Hung Parliament.
That or proposing to reform the triple lock.
Or eating a pizza with pineapple topping whilst listenig to Radiohead
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
The next version of the Conservative party will be clear populist right, and as it will be more coherent than the current version it will be a bit more successful. But the age profile is horrible still and demographics are against them. They could win if Labour do badly, but probably won't.
I think the version after that in the mid 2030s is one that could be more appealing and successful, embracing some of the different conservative values of todays younger generations, who after all, study harder, eat healthier, drink less, smoke less, and care about the planet more than my generation or the ones above me do. Those sound like conservative instincts to me, and I can see a reborn very different Conservative party doing very well with todays youngsters and some of the floating voters by then when people will be tired with Labour. Sadly the populist right period first is necessary to eventually get rid of it.
What you're assuming there, though, is that both the demographic profile and the voting habits of those who are younger stay static.
Look at what's happening in Europe, and, indeed, some early indicators of how views of young men in particular are changing here.
That's demonstrably not the case. And I wouldn't be placing any long-term reliance on it.
I'm not really assuming that. As I wrote I think a coherent populist Conservative party will do better than todays mish mash does so accepting that the messaging will work with some more than it does now. I'd put their chances of power sometime in the next 8 years in the 20-35% range, neither probable nor unlikely.
The most likely path for me is that it lurches to the right, but eventually wins again from the centre, which again won't be todays centre but could be one based more on things like fitness, technology and the environment.
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
We may well not like what we get, but we damn sure are certain we hate what we've got now.
Then, it demonstrates nothing more than a failure of imagination.
If the Conservatives disappear for a hard-right alternative, with a serious prospect of winning power, then belated "oh shits" and "what have we done?" will be just that.
Too late.
Of course, the obvious concern is that the Conservatives themselves turn into a far right alternative, and they then just sit there, being grumpy and angry, waiting to have their turn as soon as the public gets bored of Labour.
It's the fatal flaw in our democracy, these two entrenched, fossil parties that refuse to die, and keep handing power back and forth between them regardless of how loopy they become. We very nearly had Corbyn as PM a few years back; Farage (or Suella, or some revolting specimen from the extreme right of the Tory party whom we've yet to hear much about) may only be another few years away.
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
The next version of the Conservative party will be clear populist right, and as it will be more coherent than the current version it will be a bit more successful. But the age profile is horrible still and demographics are against them. They could win if Labour do badly, but probably won't.
I think the version after that in the mid 2030s is one that could be more appealing and successful, embracing some of the different conservative values of todays younger generations, who after all, study harder, eat healthier, drink less, smoke less, and care about the planet more than my generation or the ones above me do. Those sound like conservative instincts to me, and I can see a reborn very different Conservative party doing very well with todays youngsters and some of the floating voters by then when people will be tired with Labour. Sadly the populist right period first is necessary to eventually get rid of it.
What you're assuming there, though, is that both the demographic profile and the voting habits of those who are younger stay static.
Look at what's happening in Europe, and, indeed, some early indicators of how views of young men in particular are changing here.
That's demonstrably not the case. And I wouldn't be placing any long-term reliance on it.
Tomorrow belongs to them.
One reason the social democrats are in the trouble they're in right across Europe is their longformed habit of calling anyone who argues for an end to mass immigration "far right".
As a consequence, they one day might end up with the real thing.
My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
Its quite simple. Huge numbers of people are at university = huge number of people have a degree. Thus graduate scheme are much more competitive as most just require a 2:1 to apply. Thus they are all shit scared that if they rock the boat and cause trouble they will get a bad mark against their name and make it hard to get on the grad schemes.
When only 15% of people were going to uni, even if you got a Desmond, you still getting the chance to get a grad job.
And hence why invariably the mouthy ones always protesting these days are from very wealthy backgrounds as even if they do shit and get in trouble, mummy and daddy know somebody who will get them in the door.
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
In theory it shows that the justice system is not being weaponised against Biden's opponents if his own son is convicted of a crime. But the people who think it is being weaponised won't care about that.
I think they may point out the original plea deal was so incredibly soft it was laughable. I don't think you need to be a crazed MAGA type to think they tried a bit of a stitch up to get close the story down in a way a regular person wouldn't have got the same deal.
Where as Trump's seems to the be opposite. Hush money in US politics and high society has been widely used to hide the dirty laundry. If Trump hadn't won the surprise election, it would have never been anywhere near a court.
I don't agree, during lockdown I watched quite a lot of US court cases where they had gone over Zoom and a lot of plea agreements are very soft by British standards. It makes sense from the District Attorney's office as they get the less serious cases off their books and to the courts as even the least serious cases can go to jury trial which eats up loads of court time.
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
We may well not like what we get, but we damn sure are certain we hate what we've got now.
Then, it demonstrates nothing more than a failure of imagination.
If the Conservatives disappear for a hard-right alternative, with a serious prospect of winning power, then belated "oh shits" and "what have we done?" will be just that.
Too late.
I'm genuinely interested in what you think the current Tory party offer the country at the minute. Forget Labour getting a stonking majority or what they might do in office, why should I vote Tory on July 4th?
Low tax on elite school fees.
And indentured servitude for teenagers. An inspiring vision of a better future.
My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
When I was a grad, on nights out the managers left after a while for us to keep drinking and have fun without them crashing our party (I assume they went on elsewhere).
Now the grads turn up, have half a glass of water, and leave us to go on drinking, which we may as well do since they have left. An observation many of my peers agree with, so it’s not just down to the other explanation that I happen to be a massive ####.
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
In theory it shows that the justice system is not being weaponised against Biden's opponents if his own son is convicted of a crime. But the people who think it is being weaponised won't care about that.
I think they may point out the original plea deal was so incredibly soft it was laughable. I don't think you need to be a crazed MAGA type to think they tried a bit of a stitch up to get close the story down in a way a regular person wouldn't have got the same deal.
Where as Trump's seems to the be opposite. Hush money in US politics and high society has been widely used to hide the dirty laundry. If Trump hadn't won the surprise election, it would have never been anywhere near a court.
I don't agree, during lockdown I watched quite a lot of US court cases where they had gone over Zoom and a lot of plea agreements are very soft by British standards. It makes sense from the District Attorney's office as they get the less serious cases off their books and to the courts as even the least serious cases can go to jury trial which eats up loads of court time.
Erhh, it was eventually deemed too soft, hence why it went to trial. The judge said I can't sign this off, it is ridiculous.
Imagine if Labour stays on 38 and Tories start eating up Reform.
Unlikely with so much hate for Sunak, but @leon is right, if we got to 38/32 we’d all be debating if Labour could cling on for a majority.
Can only happen if loads of grumpy Reform voters suddenly decide to back Sunak as lesser of two evils, rather than sticking to their guns, or sitting on their hands, or breaking for Labour in significant numbers.
I came into this expecting the Tory vote to firm up significantly, as the fact that voters now had to actually pick a Government rather than complain/emote came into view, but there's no sign of swing back so far - and that includes among the vital elderly vote.
I would suggest the only mechanism is if something cuts through about Labour that they can be galvanised to want to STOP. Sufficiently galvanised they overlook Sunak.
Given Labour’s message discipline so far, that seems unlikely.
Yes. The Ming Vase Marathon reaches it's conclusion with the manifesto launch on Thursday, I think. If that goes according to plan then all Sir Keir has to do is get to polling day without being filmed either throwing a sack of live puppies into the Thames or anywhere with a conspicuous EU flag in the background, and he's Prime Minister. Though actually, given the popularity of the outgoing administration, he might well survive even those.
I am having visions now of Keir Starmer, wrapped in a huge EU flag, throwing a burning sack of live puppies into the Thames, whilst a chorus of trans women sing the Ode to Joy and the shadow cabinet march behind him, over a carpet made of Union Jacks and photos of the late Queen, whilst waving portraits of Marx and Stalin. That might - just - get us to a Hung Parliament.
That or proposing to reform the triple lock.
Or eating a pizza with pineapple topping whilst listenig to Radiohead
Ah .... a much more suitable punishment for photo miscreants ....
I’m not surprised by the Sky News poll. The reception we’re getting on the doors all across Aberdeenshire is way above what the polls were suggesting.
This is a hate election. The electorate hate the Tories and they intend to exact their vengeance upon them. The comedy of them being torn asunder - Reform supplanting them as the conservative vote and the LibDems supplanting them as the not Labour centre vote.
Aside from the comedy gold that are cyber Nat comments on my Facebook ads, the other quest is just how angry are Scottish voters with them? SNP collapsing to 14 is pretty brutal.
Perhaps the 66/1 on me is a good value bet. And the 100 or 150/1 you can get on my neighbouring LibDems even more so…
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
The next version of the Conservative party will be clear populist right, and as it will be more coherent than the current version it will be a bit more successful. But the age profile is horrible still and demographics are against them. They could win if Labour do badly, but probably won't.
I think the version after that in the mid 2030s is one that could be more appealing and successful, embracing some of the different conservative values of todays younger generations, who after all, study harder, eat healthier, drink less, smoke less, and care about the planet more than my generation or the ones above me do. Those sound like conservative instincts to me, and I can see a reborn very different Conservative party doing very well with todays youngsters and some of the floating voters by then when people will be tired with Labour. Sadly the populist right period first is necessary to eventually get rid of it.
What you're assuming there, though, is that both the demographic profile and the voting habits of those who are younger stay static.
Look at what's happening in Europe, and, indeed, some early indicators of how views of young men in particular are changing here.
That's demonstrably not the case. And I wouldn't be placing any long-term reliance on it.
Tomorrow belongs to them.
One reason the social democrats are in the trouble they're in right across Europe is their longformed habit of calling anyone who argues for an end to mass immigration "far right".
As a consequence, they one day might end up with the real thing.
The problem isn't voters who want an end to immigration, its politicians who promise voters that, with absolutely no intention of making it happen and also don't bother to build any of the housing and infrastructure required.
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
In theory it shows that the justice system is not being weaponised against Biden's opponents if his own son is convicted of a crime. But the people who think it is being weaponised won't care about that.
I think they may point out the original plea deal was so incredibly soft it was laughable. I don't think you need to be a crazed MAGA type to think they tried a bit of a stitch up to get close the story down in a way a regular person wouldn't have got the same deal.
Where as Trump's seems to the be opposite. Hush money in US politics and high society has been widely used to hide the dirty laundry. If Trump hadn't won the surprise election, it would have never been anywhere near a court.
I don't agree, during lockdown I watched quite a lot of US court cases where they had gone over Zoom and a lot of plea agreements are very soft by British standards. It makes sense from the District Attorney's office as they get the less serious cases off their books and to the courts as even the least serious cases can go to jury trial which eats up loads of court time.
Erhh, it was eventually deemed too soft, hence why it went to trial. The judge said I can't sign this off, it is ridiculous.
Which could be because it had a second look because of who it was.
Entirely possible such a plea would have been just waived through with no fuss or attention for anyone else.
Wow. Labour dips under 40 and the others all jostling for 2nd. Incredible SCENES
Labour are definitely on the slide and I wonder if they are suffering from being SO boring. Because they are running the most tedious election campaign in history. The only policy offer I can remember is “banning energy drinks for children under 15 and 3/4, probably”
I get that this is the Ming Vase strategy and they just want to bring it home intact but at some point if you offer nothing at all then people will look elsewhere. Not to the Tories. To the LDs or Reform
I imagine some nerves this evening at Labour HQ. A couple more shifts like this and suddenly it could be a hung parliament
In Tory land there will be suicidal despair but that’s been the case for yonks
I think Labour should be worried about this poll, but not because it puts us anywhere close to a Hung Parliament. They still have a 20-point lead.
They should be worried at what happens if they win 450+ seats on less than 40% of the vote. The democratic deficit will cause them no end of trouble.
It’s a 61% LLG - 15% Lib Dem, 8 green. If you genuinely think Labour will poll below 42% at this election with 60% LLG and lots of tactical voting, please don’t bet accordingly because you will be losing your hard earned money.
Impressive that Trump broke campaign finance laws (in a country where almost all campaign finance is allowed) and Hunter Biden broke gun ownership laws (in a country where almost anyone can own a gun)
Except felons, and drug addicts - for two. In most places.
My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
Its quite simple. Huge numbers of people are at university = huge number of people have a degree. Thus graduate scheme are much more competitive as most just require a 2:1. Thus they are all shit scared that if they rock the boat and cause trouble they will get a bad mark against their name and make it hard to get on the grad schemes.
When only 15% of people were going to uni, even if you got a Desmond, you still getting the chance to get a grad job.
And hence why invariably the mouthy ones always protesting these days are from very wealthy backgrounds as even if they do shit and get in trouble, mummy and daddy know somebody who will get them in the door.
I agree, that much tighter economic imperatives, are a big part of it. But what I hear is also a story of generalised incredulity at their whole lifestyle and outlook, across the board.
"Why don't they ever want to let themselves go ? The youth of today.."
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
In theory it shows that the justice system is not being weaponised against Biden's opponents if his own son is convicted of a crime. But the people who think it is being weaponised won't care about that.
I think they may point out the original plea deal was so incredibly soft it was laughable. I don't think you need to be a crazed MAGA type to think they tried a bit of a stitch up to get close the story down in a way a regular person wouldn't have got the same deal.
Where as Trump's seems to the be opposite. Hush money in US politics and high society has been widely used to hide the dirty laundry. If Trump hadn't won the surprise election, it would have never been anywhere near a court.
I don't agree, during lockdown I watched quite a lot of US court cases where they had gone over Zoom and a lot of plea agreements are very soft by British standards. It makes sense from the District Attorney's office as they get the less serious cases off their books and to the courts as even the least serious cases can go to jury trial which eats up loads of court time.
Erhh, it was eventually deemed too soft, hence why it went to trial. The judge said I can't sign this off, it is ridiculous.
Which could be because it had a second look because of who it was.
Entirely possible such a plea would have been just waived through with no fuss or attention for anyone else.
But they wouldn't have got it in the first place. It was so far out of what was deemed reasonable offer.
My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
When I was a grad, on nights out the managers left after a while for us to keep drinking and have fun without them crashing our party (I assume they went on elsewhere).
Now the grads turn up, have half a glass of water, and leave us to go on drinking, which we may as well do since they have left. An observation many of my peers agree with, so it’s not just down to the other explanation that I happen to be a massive ####.
My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
When I was a grad, on nights out the managers left after a while for us to keep drinking and have fun without them crashing our party (I assume they went on elsewhere).
Now the grads turn up, have half a glass of water, and leave us to go on drinking, which we may as well do since they have left. An observation many of my peers agree with, so it’s not just down to the other explanation that I happen to be a massive ####.
Being of a similar age to you I agree. It's pathetic. Our only hope is that it seems the very latest young people might be getting back to normal, leaving an inexplicably boring quotient born around 1990-2001. Guess we need some kind of war on to have interesting kids.
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
The next version of the Conservative party will be clear populist right, and as it will be more coherent than the current version it will be a bit more successful. But the age profile is horrible still and demographics are against them. They could win if Labour do badly, but probably won't.
I think the version after that in the mid 2030s is one that could be more appealing and successful, embracing some of the different conservative values of todays younger generations, who after all, study harder, eat healthier, drink less, smoke less, and care about the planet more than my generation or the ones above me do. Those sound like conservative instincts to me, and I can see a reborn very different Conservative party doing very well with todays youngsters and some of the floating voters by then when people will be tired with Labour. Sadly the populist right period first is necessary to eventually get rid of it.
What you're assuming there, though, is that both the demographic profile and the voting habits of those who are younger stay static.
Look at what's happening in Europe, and, indeed, some early indicators of how views of young men in particular are changing here.
That's demonstrably not the case. And I wouldn't be placing any long-term reliance on it.
Tomorrow belongs to them.
One reason the social democrats are in the trouble they're in right across Europe is their longformed habit of calling anyone who argues for an end to mass immigration "far right".
As a consequence, they one day might end up with the real thing.
Blackmailing the rest of us to vote Tory to prevent your side going fash?
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
In theory it shows that the justice system is not being weaponised against Biden's opponents if his own son is convicted of a crime. But the people who think it is being weaponised won't care about that.
I think they may point out the original plea deal was so incredibly soft it was laughable. I don't think you need to be a crazed MAGA type to think they tried a bit of a stitch up to get close the story down in a way a regular person wouldn't have got the same deal.
Where as Trump's seems to the be opposite. Hush money in US politics and high society has been widely used to hide the dirty laundry. If Trump hadn't won the surprise election, it would have never been anywhere near a court.
I don't agree, during lockdown I watched quite a lot of US court cases where they had gone over Zoom and a lot of plea agreements are very soft by British standards. It makes sense from the District Attorney's office as they get the less serious cases off their books and to the courts as even the least serious cases can go to jury trial which eats up loads of court time.
Erhh, it was eventually deemed too soft, hence why it went to trial. The judge said I can't sign this off, it is ridiculous.
Which could be because it had a second look because of who it was.
Entirely possible such a plea would have been just waived through with no fuss or attention for anyone else.
But they wouldn't have got it in the first place. It was so far out of what was deemed reasonable offer.
What evidence do you have they wouldn't have got it in the first place?
Under the Tory manifesto, the tax burden will RISE. It's a bad manifesto. It's not a question of whether they keep their promises; I'd prefer it if they didn't. Wastes of space. Get rid.
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
In theory it shows that the justice system is not being weaponised against Biden's opponents if his own son is convicted of a crime. But the people who think it is being weaponised won't care about that.
I think they may point out the original plea deal was so incredibly soft it was laughable. I don't think you need to be a crazed MAGA type to think they tried a bit of a stitch up to get close the story down in a way a regular person wouldn't have got the same deal.
Where as Trump's seems to the be opposite. Hush money in US politics and high society has been widely used to hide the dirty laundry. If Trump hadn't won the surprise election, it would have never been anywhere near a court.
I don't agree, during lockdown I watched quite a lot of US court cases where they had gone over Zoom and a lot of plea agreements are very soft by British standards. It makes sense from the District Attorney's office as they get the less serious cases off their books and to the courts as even the least serious cases can go to jury trial which eats up loads of court time.
Erhh, it was eventually deemed too soft, hence why it went to trial. The judge said I can't sign this off, it is ridiculous.
Which could be because it had a second look because of who it was.
Entirely possible such a plea would have been just waived through with no fuss or attention for anyone else.
But they wouldn't have got it in the first place. It was so far out of what was deemed reasonable offer.
What evidence do you have they wouldn't have got it in the first place?
The fact the judge went WTF is this, this isn't within the normal or acceptable parameters, I am not signing it off. He got a offer for a deal that was so far out of the norm it is hard not to believe it stinks.
We also have a lot of evidence that rich / poor, black / white, aren't treated fairly in the US justice system. The whole plea bargaining as if you are negotiating for a business deal seems inherently unfair, where highly paid lawyers have the time and resources to continue to go back and forth for a better deal, where as the publicly appointed lawyer won't.
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
In theory it shows that the justice system is not being weaponised against Biden's opponents if his own son is convicted of a crime. But the people who think it is being weaponised won't care about that.
I think they may point out the original plea deal was so incredibly soft it was laughable. I don't think you need to be a crazed MAGA type to think they tried a bit of a stitch up to get close the story down in a way a regular person wouldn't have got the same deal.
Where as Trump's seems to the be opposite. Hush money in US politics and high society has been widely used to hide the dirty laundry. If Trump hadn't won the surprise election, it would have never been anywhere near a court.
I don't agree, during lockdown I watched quite a lot of US court cases where they had gone over Zoom and a lot of plea agreements are very soft by British standards. It makes sense from the District Attorney's office as they get the less serious cases off their books and to the courts as even the least serious cases can go to jury trial which eats up loads of court time.
Erhh, it was eventually deemed too soft, hence why it went to trial. The judge said I can't sign this off, it is ridiculous.
Which could be because it had a second look because of who it was.
Entirely possible such a plea would have been just waived through with no fuss or attention for anyone else.
But they wouldn't have got it in the first place. It was so far out of what was deemed reasonable offer.
What evidence do you have they wouldn't have got it in the first place?
The fact the judge went WTF is this, this isn't within the normal or acceptable parameters, I am not signing it off.
Which again for anyone else may not have had a judge paying close attention to it and it could just be waived though, that's how America works.
This chart actually shows what the biggest cost will be in the Tory manifesto. As I pointed out on PB last night, the problem with the Tory manifesto is the promised increase in defence spending.
It’s not the policy of increasing defence spending to 2.5% that is the problem - for an interventionist country like ours it seems sound to increase, looking to the unstable international future of the world with more messy collapse of the Russian and US as superpowers, and the rise of EU and China. After/in addition to Ukraine, Putin will invade Moldova, and China not just certain to invade Taiwan, but claim the whole of the South China Sea.
The problem is the one political Party promising to raise defence spending to 2.5% has not realistically explained how they will fund it. In fact, this year, they have gone out of their way to avoid explaining how they will fund it - by-passed putting this increase in defence spending through their last budget* and OBR as urged by senior MPs in their party who, unlike Sunak and Hunt, genuinely care this increase is needed, so needed it funded to be for real. Instead it was delayed to be announced a few weeks later.
This means the Conservative Party has NO policy to increase defence spending to the level seen in this picture, just a gimmick that blows a huge hole into the manifesto below the cost balance waterline. If you cannot say exactly how you are funding this policy without economists laughing straight back into your face, you don’t have a realistic policy, just a gimmicky pledge - a promise not worth the paper it’s written on.
My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
When I was a grad, on nights out the managers left after a while for us to keep drinking and have fun without them crashing our party (I assume they went on elsewhere).
Now the grads turn up, have half a glass of water, and leave us to go on drinking, which we may as well do since they have left. An observation many of my peers agree with, so it’s not just down to the other explanation that I happen to be a massive ####.
My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
When I was a grad, on nights out the managers left after a while for us to keep drinking and have fun without them crashing our party (I assume they went on elsewhere).
Now the grads turn up, have half a glass of water, and leave us to go on drinking, which we may as well do since they have left. An observation many of my peers agree with, so it’s not just down to the other explanation that I happen to be a massive ####.
Being of a similar age to you I agree. It's pathetic. Our only hope is that it seems the very latest young people might be getting back to normal, leaving an inexplicably boring quotient born around 1990-2001. Guess we need some kind of war on to have interesting kids.
You’re right. The very youngest seem more fun. A reaction perhaps.
I’m not surprised by the Sky News poll. The reception we’re getting on the doors all across Aberdeenshire is way above what the polls were suggesting.
This is a hate election. The electorate hate the Tories and they intend to exact their vengeance upon them. The comedy of them being torn asunder - Reform supplanting them as the conservative vote and the LibDems supplanting them as the not Labour centre vote.
Aside from the comedy gold that are cyber Nat comments on my Facebook ads, the other quest is just how angry are Scottish voters with them? SNP collapsing to 14 is pretty brutal.
Perhaps the 66/1 on me is a good value bet. And the 100 or 150/1 you can get on my neighbouring LibDems even more so…
Will you give us the heads up the moment you suddenly think, “shit, I might actually win this and I haven’t prepared my life.”
I think there might be a few candidates like you who end up waking up on the 5th with a huge headache, not from a hangover but because they’ve actually become an MP in an moment of absent mindedness.
Interesting that Baxtering the YouGov poll gives 5 Reform. 3 of them look sensible, Clacton, Ashfield, Boston & Skegness, 1 seems plausible Wellingborough & Rushden and the 5th is Rochdale?!?
Nooooooooooooooooooooooo.
I do NOT want a Reform MP when the whole region has flipped to Labour.
Wow. Labour dips under 40 and the others all jostling for 2nd. Incredible SCENES
Labour are definitely on the slide and I wonder if they are suffering from being SO boring. Because they are running the most tedious election campaign in history. The only policy offer I can remember is “banning energy drinks for children under 15 and 3/4, probably”
I get that this is the Ming Vase strategy and they just want to bring it home intact but at some point if you offer nothing at all then people will look elsewhere. Not to the Tories. To the LDs or Reform
I imagine some nerves this evening at Labour HQ. A couple more shifts like this and suddenly it could be a hung parliament
In Tory land there will be suicidal despair but that’s been the case for yonks
I think Labour should be worried about this poll, but not because it puts us anywhere close to a Hung Parliament. They still have a 20-point lead.
They should be worried at what happens if they win 450+ seats on less than 40% of the vote. The democratic deficit will cause them no end of trouble.
Never bothered them when they won comfortably in 2005 with 35% of the vote. Nothing, in that respect at least, has changed since.
Rules of the game are set. If they win, they win. I like PR myself, but if the public wanted PR they shouldn't have rejected it by 68:32 when they had a chance not so long ago in electoral terms.
That wasn't PR, it was a system which very often would deliver an ever more disproportionate result than FPTP. In 1997 it's estimated that it would have given Labour a majority of 250 instead of 179 on 44% of the vote.
My brother-in-law, who teaches at a university, often makes a similar observation.
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
When I was a grad, on nights out the managers left after a while for us to keep drinking and have fun without them crashing our party (I assume they went on elsewhere).
Now the grads turn up, have half a glass of water, and leave us to go on drinking, which we may as well do since they have left. An observation many of my peers agree with, so it’s not just down to the other explanation that I happen to be a massive ####.
Interesting - there's still the original culture at my firm - a group of trainees will stay out every week until at least midnight. However we've diversified our intake recently and there's now two very distinct groups at work - the prayers and the partiers. It'll be interesting to see how it shakes out.
This chart actually shows what the biggest cost will be in the Tory manifesto. As I pointed out on PB last night, the problem with the Tory manifesto is the promised increase in defence spending.
It’s not the policy of increasing defence spending to 2.5% that is the problem - for an interventionist country like ours it seems sound to increase, looking to the unstable international future of the world with more messy collapse of the Russian and US as superpowers, and the rise of EU and China. After/in addition to Ukraine, Putin will invade Moldova, and China not just certain to invade Taiwan, but claim the whole of the South China Sea.
The problem is the one political Party promising to raise defence spending to 2.5% has not realistically explained how they will fund it. In fact, this year, they have gone out of their way to avoid explaining how they will fund it - by-passed putting this increase in defence spending through their last budget* and OBR as urged by senior MPs in their party who, unlike Sunak and Hunt, genuinely care this increase is needed, so needed it funded to be for real. Instead it was delayed to be announced a few weeks later.
This means the Conservative Party has NO policy to increase defence spending to the level seen in this picture, just a gimmick that blows a huge hole into the manifesto below the cost balance waterline. If you cannot say exactly how you are funding this policy without economists laughing straight back into your face, you don’t have a realistic policy, just a gimmicky pledge - a promise not worth the paper it’s written on.
This chart actually shows what the biggest cost will be in the Tory manifesto. As I pointed out on PB last night, the problem with the Tory manifesto is the promised increase in defence spending.
It’s not the policy of increasing defence spending to 2.5% that is the problem - for an interventionist country like ours it seems sound to increase, looking to the unstable international future of the world with more messy collapse of the Russian and US as superpowers, and the rise of EU and China. After/in addition to Ukraine, Putin will invade Moldova, and China not just certain to invade Taiwan, but claim the whole of the South China Sea.
The problem is the one political Party promising to raise defence spending to 2.5% has not realistically explained how they will fund it. In fact, this year, they have gone out of their way to avoid explaining how they will fund it - by-passed putting this increase in defence spending through their last budget* and OBR as urged by senior MPs in their party who, unlike Sunak and Hunt, genuinely care this increase is needed, so needed it funded to be for real. Instead it was delayed to be announced a few weeks later.
This means the Conservative Party has NO policy to increase defence spending to the level seen in this picture, just a gimmick that blows a huge hole into the manifesto below the cost balance waterline. If you cannot say exactly how you are funding this policy without economists laughing straight back into your face, you don’t have a realistic policy, just a gimmicky pledge - a promise not worth the paper it’s written on.
It is pretty clear we cannot afford it on top of everything else. And they probably know it given the delayed implementation.
The anti-Tory vote becoming more efficient is the final piece of the jigsaw. If it is maintained, the Tories are over and out - perhaps for the rest of my lifetime.
Be careful what you wish for.
You might not like what comes next.
The next version of the Conservative party will be clear populist right, and as it will be more coherent than the current version it will be a bit more successful. But the age profile is horrible still and demographics are against them. They could win if Labour do badly, but probably won't.
I think the version after that in the mid 2030s is one that could be more appealing and successful, embracing some of the different conservative values of todays younger generations, who after all, study harder, eat healthier, drink less, smoke less, and care about the planet more than my generation or the ones above me do. Those sound like conservative instincts to me, and I can see a reborn very different Conservative party doing very well with todays youngsters and some of the floating voters by then when people will be tired with Labour. Sadly the populist right period first is necessary to eventually get rid of it.
What you're assuming there, though, is that both the demographic profile and the voting habits of those who are younger stay static.
Look at what's happening in Europe, and, indeed, some early indicators of how views of young men in particular are changing here.
That's demonstrably not the case. And I wouldn't be placing any long-term reliance on it.
Tomorrow belongs to them.
One reason the social democrats are in the trouble they're in right across Europe is their longformed habit of calling anyone who argues for an end to mass immigration "far right".
As a consequence, they one day might end up with the real thing.
I think you’re projecting Casino. My issue is that the current Government has focused on simplistic and performative nonsense aimed at vulnerable people, many of whose lives and prospects in their own country have been wrecked by Western intervention, whilst at the same time facilitating immigration from certain favoured countries - India! at unprecedented levels.
There is a sensible balance to be struck around immigration, but to get there we need to deal with the causes of migration. That means dealing with climate change, investing in third world economies (and not by sending them arms), and generally trying to spread prosperity. And recognising that the legacy of the Empire that some so revere - the language, the values, is also the reason why so many want to come here.
I’m not surprised by the Sky News poll. The reception we’re getting on the doors all across Aberdeenshire is way above what the polls were suggesting.
This is a hate election. The electorate hate the Tories and they intend to exact their vengeance upon them. The comedy of them being torn asunder - Reform supplanting them as the conservative vote and the LibDems supplanting them as the not Labour centre vote.
Aside from the comedy gold that are cyber Nat comments on my Facebook ads, the other quest is just how angry are Scottish voters with them? SNP collapsing to 14 is pretty brutal.
Perhaps the 66/1 on me is a good value bet. And the 100 or 150/1 you can get on my neighbouring LibDems even more so…
Are Labour putting in much effort in your constituency?
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
Interesting poll in Ohio today:
President - Trump 48, Biden 41, Kennedy 5, Stein 1,West 1 Senate - Dem 50, Rep 45
Continues the trend that Democrat senate candidates are running a long way ahead of Biden.
He has his weaknesses as a candidate, but not that much of a weakness compared to Trump!
He really could win.
Trump won Ohio by eight last time and he's ahead by seven now which suggests not much has changed but given how close Georgia, Arizona and Wisconsin were last time, Biden can't afford for much to change unless in his favour.
Thinking of why the left wing is more likely to do tactical voting than the right seem willing to. Is it because the left are more willing to believe the opinion polls are correct and the right are more "That's what the polls are saying but everyone I know is Tory so the polls are rubbish"?
The Conservatives seem to struggle to make friends - they treated their LD coalition partners like a (I'll leave @TSE to add a suitable analogy probably involving either PornHub or dockside activities) and did the same to the DUP after 2017.
The depth of the contempt in which the governing Conservatives (NOT, I stress "local" Conservatives who seem for the most part to be able and willing to distance themsleves from the Westminster swarm) are held is there for all to see in most polls.
It's the current dynamics of politics. The Tories have been in power for 14 years for one thing - so part of the right-wing vote is anti-government. That's especially true when it's a government that's seen as quite so much of a failure by both right and left for very different reasons.
Meanwhile, Labour and the Lib Dems, and to a slightly lesser extent some Greens have broadly parked their differences to emphasise the imperative of changing the government. You simply won't hear Keir Starmer or Ed Davey attacking each other much because it's not in either of their interests - unlike in 2010 - 2019 when there were some fairly bitter fights.
The Greens want to have a bit of a scrap with Labour because they're fighting them in their two main targets, but they are so geographically limited and rely to some extent on a Labour victory elsewhere ('hold Labour to account') that it amounts to an invitation to not consider them elsewhere.
Plus both Labour and the Lib Dems have leaders who are studiously inoffensive to the kind of median voter they're both after in different places, so tactical voting is fairly natural.
But basically because EVERYONE is really angry at the Tories for their own reasons, so it makes sense for everyone to gang up on them to get rid in a way it was less important to when either Labour were in power and more people were upset with them, or there were big splits on the left and centre over Corbyn and what to do about Brexit.
Interesting that Baxtering the YouGov poll gives 5 Reform. 3 of them look sensible, Clacton, Ashfield, Boston & Skegness, 1 seems plausible Wellingborough & Rushden and the 5th is Rochdale?!?
Nooooooooooooooooooooooo.
I do NOT want a Reform MP when the whole region has flipped to Labour.
Rochdale? I could see how Rochdale could vote for Reform - in direct response to the other half of Rochdale voting for Galloway.
Would there ever have been another seat flipping between such extreme positions?
Guilty verdict against Hunter Biden is a personal blow to his father, but a significant political boost.
Why a political boost?
Interesting poll in Ohio today:
President - Trump 48, Biden 41, Kennedy 5, Stein 1,West 1 Senate - Dem 50, Rep 45
Continues the trend that Democrat senate candidates are running a long way ahead of Biden.
That's a very small swing to Biden in Ohio compared to 2020.
Indeed, although Virginia and Minnesota seem to have swung the other way (although there haven't been many state polls outside AZ, GA, NV, NC, PA, WI, MI)
Interesting that Baxtering the YouGov poll gives 5 Reform. 3 of them look sensible, Clacton, Ashfield, Boston & Skegness, 1 seems plausible Wellingborough & Rushden and the 5th is Rochdale?!?
Nooooooooooooooooooooooo.
I do NOT want a Reform MP when the whole region has flipped to Labour.
Rochdale? I could see how Rochdale could vote for Reform - in direct response to the other half of Rochdale voting for Galloway.
Would there ever have been another seat flipping between such extreme positions?
Have you not got another picture to use?
Are your eyes always like little slits in castle walls they fire arrows and piss out of?
This chart actually shows what the biggest cost will be in the Tory manifesto. As I pointed out on PB last night, the problem with the Tory manifesto is the promised increase in defence spending.
It’s not the policy of increasing defence spending to 2.5% that is the problem - for an interventionist country like ours it seems sound to increase, looking to the unstable international future of the world with more messy collapse of the Russian and US as superpowers, and the rise of EU and China. After/in addition to Ukraine, Putin will invade Moldova, and China not just certain to invade Taiwan, but claim the whole of the South China Sea.
The problem is the one political Party promising to raise defence spending to 2.5% has not realistically explained how they will fund it. In fact, this year, they have gone out of their way to avoid explaining how they will fund it - by-passed putting this increase in defence spending through their last budget* and OBR as urged by senior MPs in their party who, unlike Sunak and Hunt, genuinely care this increase is needed, so needed it funded to be for real. Instead it was delayed to be announced a few weeks later.
This means the Conservative Party has NO policy to increase defence spending to the level seen in this picture, just a gimmick that blows a huge hole into the manifesto below the cost balance waterline. If you cannot say exactly how you are funding this policy without economists laughing straight back into your face, you don’t have a realistic policy, just a gimmicky pledge - a promise not worth the paper it’s written on.
I’ve been pondering defence expenditure. Both big parties want to increase it. Can we somehow get more socioeconomic benefit from it, other than just greater employment in shipyards, military recruitment etc? Obviously we are not going to have the SBS running breakfast clubs in Hackney, but you get my drift (maybe)?
Comments
He says that he and his coterie of academics are often complaining that the students are too buttoned-up, "square" and strait-laced. There are some very strange reversals of very longstanding and old generational stereotypes going on at the moment.
Overall 48% Right, 32% Left, 18% centre. That’s possible landslide territory.
Earlier I paid a brief visit to Marianské Lazně. Famous for being the setting of Last Year at Marienbad.
It of course makes no difference to the result but its the sort of laziness that big leads invite.
The most likely path for me is that it lurches to the right, but eventually wins again from the centre, which again won't be todays centre but could be one based more on things like fitness, technology and the environment.
It's the fatal flaw in our democracy, these two entrenched, fossil parties that refuse to die, and keep handing power back and forth between them regardless of how loopy they become. We very nearly had Corbyn as PM a few years back; Farage (or Suella, or some revolting specimen from the extreme right of the Tory party whom we've yet to hear much about) may only be another few years away.
As a consequence, they one day might end up with the real thing.
When only 15% of people were going to uni, even if you got a Desmond, you still getting the chance to get a grad job.
And hence why invariably the mouthy ones always protesting these days are from very wealthy backgrounds as even if they do shit and get in trouble, mummy and daddy know somebody who will get them in the door.
Landesspiegel Liechtenstein - Bar Association warns against abolition of the third instance [aka Liechtenstein Supreme Court]
https://landesspiegel.li/2024/06/rechtsanwaltskammer-warnt-vor-abschaffung-der-dritten-instanz/
Now the grads turn up, have half a glass of water, and leave us to go on drinking, which we may as well do since they have left. An observation many of my peers agree with, so it’s not just down to the other explanation that I happen to be a massive ####.
This is a hate election. The electorate hate the Tories and they intend to exact their vengeance upon them. The comedy of them being torn asunder - Reform supplanting them as the conservative vote and the LibDems supplanting them as the not Labour centre vote.
Aside from the comedy gold that are cyber Nat comments on my Facebook ads, the other quest is just how angry are Scottish voters with them? SNP collapsing to 14 is pretty brutal.
Perhaps the 66/1 on me is a good value bet. And the 100 or 150/1 you can get on my neighbouring LibDems even more so…
President - Trump 48, Biden 41, Kennedy 5, Stein 1,West 1
Senate - Dem 50, Rep 45
Continues the trend that Democrat senate candidates are running a long way ahead of Biden.
Entirely possible such a plea would have been just waived through with no fuss or attention for anyone else.
"Why don't they ever want to let themselves go ? The youth of today.."
We also have a lot of evidence that rich / poor, black / white, aren't treated fairly in the US justice system. The whole plea bargaining as if you are negotiating for a business deal seems inherently unfair, where highly paid lawyers have the time and resources to continue to go back and forth for a better deal, where as the publicly appointed lawyer won't.
He really could win.
It’s not the policy of increasing defence spending to 2.5% that is the problem - for an interventionist country like ours it seems sound to increase, looking to the unstable international future of the world with more messy collapse of the Russian and US as superpowers, and the rise of EU and China. After/in addition to Ukraine, Putin will invade Moldova, and China not just certain to invade Taiwan, but claim the whole of the South China Sea.
The problem is the one political Party promising to raise defence spending to 2.5% has not realistically explained how they will fund it. In fact, this year, they have gone out of their way to avoid explaining how they will fund it - by-passed putting this increase in defence spending through their last budget* and OBR as urged by senior MPs in their party who, unlike Sunak and Hunt, genuinely care this increase is needed, so needed it funded to be for real. Instead it was delayed to be announced a few weeks later.
This means the Conservative Party has NO policy to increase defence spending to the level seen in this picture, just a gimmick that blows a huge hole into the manifesto below the cost balance waterline. If you cannot say exactly how you are funding this policy without economists laughing straight back into your face, you don’t have a realistic policy, just a gimmicky pledge - a promise not worth the paper it’s written on.
I think there might be a few candidates like you who end up waking up on the 5th with a huge headache, not from a hangover but because they’ve actually become an MP in an moment of absent mindedness.
I do NOT want a Reform MP when the whole region has flipped to Labour.
NEW THREAD
There is a sensible balance to be struck around immigration, but to get there we need to deal with the causes of migration. That means dealing with climate change, investing in third world economies (and not by sending them arms), and generally trying to spread prosperity. And recognising that the legacy of the Empire that some so revere - the language, the values, is also the reason why so many want to come here.
Meanwhile, Labour and the Lib Dems, and to a slightly lesser extent some Greens have broadly parked their differences to emphasise the imperative of changing the government. You simply won't hear Keir Starmer or Ed Davey attacking each other much because it's not in either of their interests - unlike in 2010 - 2019 when there were some fairly bitter fights.
The Greens want to have a bit of a scrap with Labour because they're fighting them in their two main targets, but they are so geographically limited and rely to some extent on a Labour victory elsewhere ('hold Labour to account') that it amounts to an invitation to not consider them elsewhere.
Plus both Labour and the Lib Dems have leaders who are studiously inoffensive to the kind of median voter they're both after in different places, so tactical voting is fairly natural.
But basically because EVERYONE is really angry at the Tories for their own reasons, so it makes sense for everyone to gang up on them to get rid in a way it was less important to when either Labour were in power and more people were upset with them, or there were big splits on the left and centre over Corbyn and what to do about Brexit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufSlBNGJkek&t=44s
Would there ever have been another seat flipping between such extreme positions?
Are your eyes always like little slits in castle walls they fire arrows and piss out of?
Very best of luck and all that.