Scotland are awful and the red card was stonewall. But, they might come back in this group. We’ll see.
Bearing in mind that the best 4 3rd placers get through then they have a real chance with 4 points maybe 3 although poor goal difference won't help when compared to other 3rd place teams.
Just had a bit of Youtube music on in the background, a mediaeval tune called Merrie Summer ilast came up on the playlist...
I just casually saw a comment from @ReformUk, logo and all; "It is imperative that British culture and history be preserved, especially in these times".
Except the song was being sung by a Polish mediaeval group and was recorded in a church in Gdynia.
Its not just the stupid racism that makes these people such twats. Its the stupid stupid.
Have you verified that none of the members of the group support PiS? Perhaps they deserve your condemnation too.
The Poles were just singing- rather well- in middle english. Not a likely hotbed for PiS to be fair.
I tend to agree with Casino that there's good reason to suspect Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
Britain has severe problems, but the public have no appetite for hard choices. Difficult things need to be done, but Starmer's approach is timid and betrays a lack of confidence. He hasn't done any of the work to prepare the public for difficult times that Cameron and Osborne did in advance of the 2010GE.
It's very easy to see Starmer and the Labour government becoming deeply unpopular very quickly. The difficult bit is, who do the voters turn to next?
There are lots of reasons to doubt a credible opposition emerging, but Starmer is showing that simply not being the incumbent government can sometimes be enough.
But, er, maybe Starmer will surprise on the upside?
Sir Keir will be 66 by the time of the next election. Will he hand over to Streeting or AN Other in office (assuming he wins)?
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
Not in most polls.
Techne, Redfield and Wilton, We Think and Whitestone all have Labour in the low forties, perhaps 1 or 2 points down on a week ago.
That Ming vase is nearly over the line.
It's making you think too much: I get it, it's worrying.
But you know I'm right.
My only worry is that my betting position is best on Con 26%+ and 150+ seats.
The Cons look as if they might be half that.
It's possible. But I'm still not sure about Reform's real appeal.
Worth looking back to 2015; UKIP polling was generally even higher than Reform now - multiple VIs at 20+% IIRC - but still only managed 12.6% in the actual vote.
While that may now be taken into account in methodologies, pricing in a degree of apathy/skittishness, I still think Reform will significantly underperform their VI polling at the actual vote.
Was it that high? It’s amazing what you forget. Were we all talking up ukip seats (in addition to Carswell)? Actually, even he lost didn’t he?
I’ve gone back and looked and I didn’t recall correctly - it wasn’t that high, though the polling is actually very similar to what Reform are getting now at the same stage (interestingly they tailed off in the week before the vote).
Carswell won, in fact - though of course he ended up standing as an independent at the next one.
I don’t remember what the state of commentary re ukip was on here, though given that both the main parties were polling mid-30s it lacked the collapse-and-crossover narrative we have this time.
No Carswell didn't stand as an Independent in 2017. He didn't stand at all.
I tend to agree with Casino that there's good reason to suspect Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
Britain has severe problems, but the public have no appetite for hard choices. Difficult things need to be done, but Starmer's approach is timid and betrays a lack of confidence. He hasn't done any of the work to prepare the public for difficult times that Cameron and Osborne did in advance of the 2010GE.
It's very easy to see Starmer and the Labour government becoming deeply unpopular very quickly. The difficult bit is, who do the voters turn to next?
There are lots of reasons to doubt a credible opposition emerging, but Starmer is showing that simply not being the incumbent government can sometimes be enough.
But, er, maybe Starmer will surprise on the upside?
He will need some early wins thats for sure.
Waiting lists are probably going to head down next year as the post-pandemic plays itself out a bit.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
Not in most polls.
Techne, Redfield and Wilton, We Think and Whitestone all have Labour in the low forties, perhaps 1 or 2 points down on a week ago.
That Ming vase is nearly over the line.
It's making you think too much: I get it, it's worrying.
But you know I'm right.
My only worry is that my betting position is best on Con 26%+ and 150+ seats.
The Cons look as if they might be half that.
It's possible. But I'm still not sure about Reform's real appeal.
Worth looking back to 2015; UKIP polling was generally even higher than Reform now - multiple VIs at 20+% IIRC - but still only managed 12.6% in the actual vote.
While that may now be taken into account in methodologies, pricing in a degree of apathy/skittishness, I still think Reform will significantly underperform their VI polling at the actual vote.
Was it that high? It’s amazing what you forget. Were we all talking up ukip seats (in addition to Carswell)? Actually, even he lost didn’t he?
I’ve gone back and looked and I didn’t recall correctly - it wasn’t that high, though the polling is actually very similar to what Reform are getting now at the same stage (interestingly they tailed off in the week before the vote).
Carswell won, in fact - though of course he ended up standing as an independent at the next one.
I don’t remember what the state of commentary re ukip was on here, though given that both the main parties were polling mid-30s it lacked the collapse-and-crossover narrative we have this time.
Thanks - for clarity no implied attack on you btw. You weren’t far off and it might have “felt” similar given that we hadn’t seen a 4th party since the early 80s.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
That'll be "no, there aren't any data showing Labour down seven points in seven days", then.
It was posted on here earlier today or yesterday. No, I can't be arsed finding it. You can if you like.
You know I'm right. Hence the twitchy pedantry that avoids the substantive point.
Conclusion: you suspect I might be right and want to rapidly shut it down.
If you are right, that's interesting and important. But only if it's true.
Which is why I went to have a look... and I don't see any sign that it is true. If you've got something, great, bring it on. But I'm sure you respect us all enough to know that "it was posted here sometime, but I can't be bothered to find it" doesn't cut the mustard.
I tend to agree with Casino that there's good reason to suspect Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
Britain has severe problems, but the public have no appetite for hard choices. Difficult things need to be done, but Starmer's approach is timid and betrays a lack of confidence. He hasn't done any of the work to prepare the public for difficult times that Cameron and Osborne did in advance of the 2010GE.
It's very easy to see Starmer and the Labour government becoming deeply unpopular very quickly. The difficult bit is, who do the voters turn to next?
There are lots of reasons to doubt a credible opposition emerging, but Starmer is showing that simply not being the incumbent government can sometimes be enough.
But, er, maybe Starmer will surprise on the upside?
Tend to agree with this assessment. However. Events could play a part too. An end to the conflicts in Ukraine and Palestine. Comedic turmoil preventing any kind of opposition narrative to form. Gradual, consistent, if slow, growth. A determination to hammer the previous government's record can last a decade or more. There's plenty of material.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
Yet Starmer's ratings have gone up recently. I think BeyondTopline may well be right that Labour's decrease in polling is largely being driven by Lab to LD tactical voters rather than dissatisfaction with Labour. A similar thing happened in 97.
It’s all he has left to console himself: the hope that the Labour Government will fail spectacularly and in record quick time.
Hmm, maybe, but have you considered I might also be right?
Look at recent polling: Labour's lead is as soft as babyfood (as @Leon said), entirely fuelled by uniting temporarily as an ejection mechanism for the existing administration and could rapidly splinter to Reform, Greens, the LDs and the Conservatives once in office.
How much more do Labour have to fall for Reform to start taking seats that Starmer has already banked?
If Nigey builds up a head of steam the Red Wall could fall like Dominoes. Then, Nigel's your uncle, Nigel is PM.
No, I'm getting ahead of myself there. I still think the reality is 8 out of 8 attempts and losses for Nige, this GE.
If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve. Just thought I’d make that clear.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
Yet Starmer's ratings have gone up recently. I think BeyondTopline may well be right that Labour's decrease in polling is largely being driven by Lab to LD tactical voters rather than dissatisfaction with Labour. A similar thing happened in 97.
It’s all he has left to console himself: the hope that the Labour Government will fail spectacularly and in record quick time.
Hmm, maybe, but have you considered I might also be right?
Look at recent polling: Labour's lead is as soft as babyfood (as @Leon said), entirely fuelled by uniting temporarily as an ejection mechanism for the existing administration and could rapidly splinter to Reform, Greens, the LDs and the Conservatives once in office.
How much more do Labour have to fall for Reform to start taking seats that Starmer has already banked?
If Labours polling falls then there’s likely to be an increase in tactical voting with the Greens and Lib Dems horrified at the thought of Reform coming to their aid.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
History also says that an 80-seat majority can't be overturned in one go. If people are fed up then party loyalty is going to drop.
Only one government in a century has been a single term, including through much bigger crises too.
British voters may be unenthusiastic but pretty much always are willing to give a government a second chance.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
Not in most polls.
Techne, Redfield and Wilton, We Think and Whitestone all have Labour in the low forties, perhaps 1 or 2 points down on a week ago.
That Ming vase is nearly over the line.
It's making you think too much: I get it, it's worrying.
But you know I'm right.
My only worry is that my betting position is best on Con 26%+ and 150+ seats.
The Cons look as if they might be half that.
It's possible. But I'm still not sure about Reform's real appeal.
Worth looking back to 2015; UKIP polling was generally even higher than Reform now - multiple VIs at 20+% IIRC - but still only managed 12.6% in the actual vote.
While that may now be taken into account in methodologies, pricing in a degree of apathy/skittishness, I still think Reform will significantly underperform their VI polling at the actual vote.
Was it that high? It’s amazing what you forget. Were we all talking up ukip seats (in addition to Carswell)? Actually, even he lost didn’t he?
I’ve gone back and looked and I didn’t recall correctly - it wasn’t that high, though the polling is actually very similar to what Reform are getting now at the same stage (interestingly they tailed off in the week before the vote).
Carswell won, in fact - though of course he ended up standing as an independent at the next one.
I don’t remember what the state of commentary re ukip was on here, though given that both the main parties were polling mid-30s it lacked the collapse-and-crossover narrative we have this time.
No Carswell didn't stand as an Independent in 2017. He didn't stand at all.
You are right and I clearly need a lie down.
LOL. I hope my reply didn't come over as too forthright. It was not intended that way
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
Here's your problem: you think everyone else's political analysis is as emotional as yours is, and thus you respond in kind.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
Do you not see how quoting historical precedents is useful, but not a slam dunk given the distant lack of precedented times since 2015?
Things are more in flux.
Consider that on these boundaries you are currently watching an adjusted Tory majority of over 100 completely reversed.
I wonder, will a Labour government decide to ‘revise’ many or all of the recent changes to the electoral system.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
History also says that an 80-seat majority can't be overturned in one go. If people are fed up then party loyalty is going to drop.
Only one government in a century has been a single term, including through much bigger crises too.
British voters may be unenthusiastic but pretty much always are willing to give a government a second chance.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
History also says that an 80-seat majority can't be overturned in one go. If people are fed up then party loyalty is going to drop.
The lessons from this parliament that we absolutely should learn are that we can’t assume that any sort of majority bakes in another term.
If people want the party of power out, they will find a way to do so.
I think it’s probable Labour get at least 2 terms, based on historical precedent. But we can’t with any certainty predict the result of an election 5 years from now. We don’t even know what the opposition will look like right now, and what form it will take.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
Yet Starmer's ratings have gone up recently. I think BeyondTopline may well be right that Labour's decrease in polling is largely being driven by Lab to LD tactical voters rather than dissatisfaction with Labour. A similar thing happened in 97.
It’s all he has left to console himself: the hope that the Labour Government will fail spectacularly and in record quick time.
Hmm, maybe, but have you considered I might also be right?
Look at recent polling: Labour's lead is as soft as babyfood (as @Leon said), entirely fuelled by uniting temporarily as an ejection mechanism for the existing administration and could rapidly splinter to Reform, Greens, the LDs and the Conservatives once in office.
For what it’s worth, on balance I agree with you. We might be wrong, but I don’t see Starmer “doing a Cameron” and playing austerity cards well. It’s harder for Labour.
Yeah, even as a member of PB’s centrist dad faction, I think Casino deserves more of a hearing than he’s getting.
Starmer has proved he’s ruthless with his internal critics, I’ll give him that. He’s put together a “don’t scare the horses” electoral programme which has convinced people he will somehow fix things without charging them an extra penny in tax.
And he’s done all this in the face of the most inept Government in living memory. Ok, maybe that’s not so much of an achievement.
From 4th July it’s all on him. Having Sue Gray as your enforcer doesn’t magic up any extra money when you’ve pledged yourself to Tory spending limits, a bit of a tweak to CGT aside. The doctors want paying. So do the train drivers. Ok, let’s tax Mr £100m Tesco boss a bit more? Whoops. We promised not to do that. Now Ukraine needs some armaments. Shall we cancel the 0.7 of a planning officer we’ve promised to every district council? What do you mean that’s not going to raise enough?
Starmer’s lead on the supposition that Labour will fix things is the very definition of hopium. I’m going to be delighted to see Sunak out on his ear just because such pure incompetence deserves to be rewarded, but I’m under no illusions Britain’s government is going to get any better.
I tend to agree with Casino that there's good reason to suspect Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
Britain has severe problems, but the public have no appetite for hard choices. Difficult things need to be done, but Starmer's approach is timid and betrays a lack of confidence. He hasn't done any of the work to prepare the public for difficult times that Cameron and Osborne did in advance of the 2010GE.
It's very easy to see Starmer and the Labour government becoming deeply unpopular very quickly. The difficult bit is, who do the voters turn to next?
There are lots of reasons to doubt a credible opposition emerging, but Starmer is showing that simply not being the incumbent government can sometimes be enough.
But, er, maybe Starmer will surprise on the upside?
Yes, history tells us whatever most of think now is likely to be wildly inaccurate.
You and @Casino_Royale may be right and we are moving into a period of extreme political volatility - I'm not completely convinced but I understand the argument.
As we don't know what will happen on July 4th, we can only speculate. I think two terms won't be unreasonable but Governments and Prime Ministers have a shelf life - both Thatcher and Blair arguably could and should have gone earlier but events, dear boy, events as someone once said.
I recall the concensus being Thatcher wouldn't last long whereas Johnson was going to be in for a decade or more.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
History also says that an 80-seat majority can't be overturned in one go. If people are fed up then party loyalty is going to drop.
Only one government in a century has been a single term, including through much bigger crises too.
British voters may be unenthusiastic but pretty much always are willing to give a government a second chance.
For all our sins as a nation we are very unvolatile politically. It’s a combination of “mustn’t grumble” with being sportsmen and giving a chap a chance and the benefit of the doubt. I hope we never lose that - I worry that the next few polls, should none show reform in second, will be met by Farage claiming the pollsters are part of an establishment conspiracy to keep them out of debates etc. we don’t need that kind of crap.
I tend to agree with Casino that there's good reason to suspect Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
Britain has severe problems, but the public have no appetite for hard choices. Difficult things need to be done, but Starmer's approach is timid and betrays a lack of confidence. He hasn't done any of the work to prepare the public for difficult times that Cameron and Osborne did in advance of the 2010GE.
It's very easy to see Starmer and the Labour government becoming deeply unpopular very quickly. The difficult bit is, who do the voters turn to next?
There are lots of reasons to doubt a credible opposition emerging, but Starmer is showing that simply not being the incumbent government can sometimes be enough.
But, er, maybe Starmer will surprise on the upside?
Sir Keir will be 66 by the time of the next election. Will he hand over to Streeting or AN Other in office (assuming he wins)?
Well. If he gets really unpopular, who knows. The winning party leader has failed to fight the next election following the last three general elections. Why not a fourth?
Just got Yougoved for specifics of how I would vote in my constituency with the named candidates. I presume this is for a future MRP poll?
Mentioned that to Mrs Eek so she went to Yougov. Didn’t get that question just who out of the last 5 PMs is responsible for the current Tory situation.
A harder decision than you would expect as all hold some responsibility albeit May only because of her desire to fix social care
Yep I got that question. I put Sunak. Personally I believe that no matter how dire a situation you inherit there is always some scope to improve - perhaps even more so if the situation is really dire. The fact that Sunak has done nothing to improve things for the country as a wholeand has actually mangaed to make them worse says everything I need to know about him.
He did do things to improve things for the country, just not sexy big things. He regained the trust of the markets - whether you like it or not it’s vital - he stabilised a potentially out of control economic situation, he improved relations with Europe - Windsor framework, personal relations with European leaders (he does by all accounts have a very good personal relationship with Macron and Meloni, and is appreciated by others) especially after the Boris years.
We were absolutely in a mess when he took over and he did things that the man on the street will never appreciate but in the long term they improved the country from what he took over. He was never in a position to start driving any vision because he was cleaning up an absolute mess.
You cannot believe this utter tripe. He was Chancellor of the Exchequer for much of the 'mess' you describe. He hasn't 'stabilised' the economy, the economy is actually now in a brittle state where it cannot return to growth without it causing inflation and the Bank of England punishing it with interest rate rises - the only way out of that buzzwire game is to increase supply, which can bring growth without inflation, and he's done nothing to increase supply, of homes, of energy, of food, or of anything else except boat people.
As for 'driving any vision' - if he had any long term vision, it would be in the manifesto - though whether anyone found such a document from him believable is another matter of course - but there's no vision in the manifesto. It doesn't even envisage a reduction of the tax burden. He has nothing to offer but being a helpless passenger on the bus of British decline, but in some indefinable way suggesting he will 'do it better' than SKS, when all the available evidence suggests he is worse in every particular.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
Do you not see how quoting historical precedents is useful, but not a slam dunk given the distant lack of precedented times since 2015?
Things are more in flux.
Consider that on these boundaries you are currently watching an adjusted Tory majority of over 100 completely reversed.
I wonder, will a Labour government decide to ‘revise’ many or all of the recent changes to the electoral system.
It would be good to see them dumping the stupid ID requirements for in person voting but also tighten the rules on postal voting. These are easy things to do which require little time or money but which would be worth doing because they are 'right' for democracy.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
Yet Starmer's ratings have gone up recently. I think BeyondTopline may well be right that Labour's decrease in polling is largely being driven by Lab to LD tactical voters rather than dissatisfaction with Labour. A similar thing happened in 97.
It’s all he has left to console himself: the hope that the Labour Government will fail spectacularly and in record quick time.
Hmm, maybe, but have you considered I might also be right?
Look at recent polling: Labour's lead is as soft as babyfood (as @Leon said), entirely fuelled by uniting temporarily as an ejection mechanism for the existing administration and could rapidly splinter to Reform, Greens, the LDs and the Conservatives once in office.
How much more do Labour have to fall for Reform to start taking seats that Starmer has already banked?
If Nigey builds up a head of steam the Red Wall could fall like Dominoes. Then, Nigel's your uncle, Nigel is PM.
No, I'm getting ahead of myself there. I still think the reality is 8 out of 8 attempts and losses for Nige, this GE.
If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve. Just thought I’d make that clear.
Just got Yougoved for specifics of how I would vote in my constituency with the named candidates. I presume this is for a future MRP poll?
Mentioned that to Mrs Eek so she went to Yougov. Didn’t get that question just who out of the last 5 PMs is responsible for the current Tory situation.
A harder decision than you would expect as all hold some responsibility albeit May only because of her desire to fix social care
Yep I got that question. I put Sunak. Personally I believe that no matter how dire a situation you inherit there is always some scope to improve - perhaps even more so if the situation is really dire. The fact that Sunak has done nothing to improve things for the country as a wholeand has actually mangaed to make them worse says everything I need to know about him.
He did do things to improve things for the country, just not sexy big things. He regained the trust of the markets - whether you like it or not it’s vital - he stabilised a potentially out of control economic situation, he improved relations with Europe - Windsor framework, personal relations with European leaders (he does by all accounts have a very good personal relationship with Macron and Meloni, and is appreciated by others) especially after the Boris years.
We were absolutely in a mess when he took over and he did things that the man on the street will never appreciate but in the long term they improved the country from what he took over. He was never in a position to start driving any vision because he was cleaning up an absolute mess.
You cannot believe this utter tripe. He was Chancellor of the Exchequer for much of the 'mess' you describe. He hasn't 'stabilised' the economy, the economy is actually now in a brittle state where it cannot return to growth without it causing inflation and the Bank of England punishing it with interest rate rises - the only way out of that buzzwire game is to increase supply, which can bring growth without inflation, and he's done nothing to increase supply, of homes, of energy, of food, or of anything else except boat people.
As for 'driving any vision' - if he had any long term vision, it would be in the manifesto - though whether anyone found such a document from him believable is another matter of course - but there's no vision in the manifesto. It doesn't even envisage a reduction of the tax burden. He has nothing to offer but being a helpless passenger on the bus of British decline, but in some indefinable way suggesting he will 'do it better' than SKS, when all the available evidence suggests he is worse in every particular.
Course. It is this very lack of any enthusiasm, which Casino rightly identifies, which makes surprising on the upside much more likely. Success = performance - expectations.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
That'll be "no, there aren't any data showing Labour down seven points in seven days", then.
It was posted on here earlier today or yesterday. No, I can't be arsed finding it. You can if you like.
You know I'm right. Hence the twitchy pedantry that avoids the substantive point.
Conclusion: you suspect I might be right and want to rapidly shut it down.
If you are right, that's interesting and important. But only if it's true.
Which is why I went to have a look... and I don't see any sign that it is true. If you've got something, great, bring it on. But I'm sure you respect us all enough to know that "it was posted here sometime, but I can't be bothered to find it" doesn't cut the mustard.
So 37 percent now, so the seven percent fall is from 44 percent. Which was on 28 May. So not seven days, but still a chunky fall. Maggie-to-Major was about a ten percent swing from memory.
But, there's some small print. New methodology from 1st June. There's been talk of it here.
We have tested the new approach over a number of waves of data, and on average it makes about three points difference to the lead (mostly at the expense of Labour, rather than aiding the Tories), and also increases the Liberal Democrats by about two points.
So that's about half the change there. And three points down... That sounds like Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven.
You work in engineering, don't you? You know to always check the small print- especially when the big print tell you what you want to be true.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
Yet Starmer's ratings have gone up recently. I think BeyondTopline may well be right that Labour's decrease in polling is largely being driven by Lab to LD tactical voters rather than dissatisfaction with Labour. A similar thing happened in 97.
It’s all he has left to console himself: the hope that the Labour Government will fail spectacularly and in record quick time.
Hmm, maybe, but have you considered I might also be right?
Look at recent polling: Labour's lead is as soft as babyfood (as @Leon said), entirely fuelled by uniting temporarily as an ejection mechanism for the existing administration and could rapidly splinter to Reform, Greens, the LDs and the Conservatives once in office.
For what it’s worth, on balance I agree with you. We might be wrong, but I don’t see Starmer “doing a Cameron” and playing austerity cards well. It’s harder for Labour.
Yeah, even as a member of PB’s centrist dad faction, I think Casino deserves more of a hearing than he’s getting.
Starmer has proved he’s ruthless with his internal critics, I’ll give him that. He’s put together a “don’t scare the horses” electoral programme which has convinced people he will somehow fix things without charging them an extra penny in tax.
And he’s done all this in the face of the most inept Government in living memory. Ok, maybe that’s not so much of an achievement.
From 4th July it’s all on him. Having Sue Gray as your enforcer doesn’t magic up any extra money when you’ve pledged yourself to Tory spending limits, a bit of a tweak to CGT aside. The doctors want paying. So do the train drivers. Ok, let’s tax Mr £100m Tesco boss a bit more? Whoops. We promised not to do that. Now Ukraine needs some armaments. Shall we cancel the 0.7 of a planning officer we’ve promised to every district council? What do you mean that’s not going to raise enough?
Starmer’s lead on the supposition that Labour will fix things is the very definition of hopium. I’m going to be delighted to see Sunak out on his ear just because such pure incompetence deserves to be rewarded, but I’m under no illusions Britain’s government is going to get any better.
And we are due a PROPER recession, in so far as these things come due.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
That'll be "no, there aren't any data showing Labour down seven points in seven days", then.
It was posted on here earlier today or yesterday. No, I can't be arsed finding it. You can if you like.
You know I'm right. Hence the twitchy pedantry that avoids the substantive point.
Conclusion: you suspect I might be right and want to rapidly shut it down.
If you are right, that's interesting and important. But only if it's true.
Which is why I went to have a look... and I don't see any sign that it is true. If you've got something, great, bring it on. But I'm sure you respect us all enough to know that "it was posted here sometime, but I can't be bothered to find it" doesn't cut the mustard.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
Do you not see how quoting historical precedents is useful, but not a slam dunk given the distant lack of precedented times since 2015?
Things are more in flux.
Consider that on these boundaries you are currently watching an adjusted Tory majority of over 100 completely reversed.
I wonder, will a Labour government decide to ‘revise’ many or all of the recent changes to the electoral system.
It would be good to see them dumping the stupid ID requirements for in person voting but also tighten the rules on postal voting. These are easy things to do which require little time or money but which would be worth doing because they are 'right' for democracy.
Voter's who have stepped this side of the White Cliffs of Dover for the last half century can f*** off too!
I tend to agree with Casino that there's good reason to suspect Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
Britain has severe problems, but the public have no appetite for hard choices. Difficult things need to be done, but Starmer's approach is timid and betrays a lack of confidence. He hasn't done any of the work to prepare the public for difficult times that Cameron and Osborne did in advance of the 2010GE.
It's very easy to see Starmer and the Labour government becoming deeply unpopular very quickly. The difficult bit is, who do the voters turn to next?
There are lots of reasons to doubt a credible opposition emerging, but Starmer is showing that simply not being the incumbent government can sometimes be enough.
But, er, maybe Starmer will surprise on the upside?
Tend to agree with this assessment. However. Events could play a part too. An end to the conflicts in Ukraine and Palestine. Comedic turmoil preventing any kind of opposition narrative to form. Gradual, consistent, if slow, growth. A determination to hammer the previous government's record can last a decade or more. There's plenty of material.
Sadly, I don't see an end to the Ukraine conflict any time soon. The Ukrainians are nowhere near giving up, and the Russians are nowhere near backing down.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
Yet Starmer's ratings have gone up recently. I think BeyondTopline may well be right that Labour's decrease in polling is largely being driven by Lab to LD tactical voters rather than dissatisfaction with Labour. A similar thing happened in 97.
It’s all he has left to console himself: the hope that the Labour Government will fail spectacularly and in record quick time.
Hmm, maybe, but have you considered I might also be right?
Look at recent polling: Labour's lead is as soft as babyfood (as @Leon said), entirely fuelled by uniting temporarily as an ejection mechanism for the existing administration and could rapidly splinter to Reform, Greens, the LDs and the Conservatives once in office.
For what it’s worth, on balance I agree with you. We might be wrong, but I don’t see Starmer “doing a Cameron” and playing austerity cards well. It’s harder for Labour.
Yeah, even as a member of PB’s centrist dad faction, I think Casino deserves more of a hearing than he’s getting.
Starmer has proved he’s ruthless with his internal critics, I’ll give him that. He’s put together a “don’t scare the horses” electoral programme which has convinced people he will somehow fix things without charging them an extra penny in tax.
And he’s done all this in the face of the most inept Government in living memory. Ok, maybe that’s not so much of an achievement.
From 4th July it’s all on him. Having Sue Gray as your enforcer doesn’t magic up any extra money when you’ve pledged yourself to Tory spending limits, a bit of a tweak to CGT aside. The doctors want paying. So do the train drivers. Ok, let’s tax Mr £100m Tesco boss a bit more? Whoops. We promised not to do that. Now Ukraine needs some armaments. Shall we cancel the 0.7 of a planning officer we’ve promised to every district council? What do you mean that’s not going to raise enough?
Starmer’s lead on the supposition that Labour will fix things is the very definition of hopium. I’m going to be delighted to see Sunak out on his ear just because such pure incompetence deserves to be rewarded, but I’m under no illusions Britain’s government is going to get any better.
It’s not clear whether Casino means Starmer personally, or Labour as a government. The former is much more likely - if the Tories get the kind of defeat they appear to be heading for and most certainly deserve, it is hard to see Labour losing a majority in 2028 barring some LibDem miracle.
I tend to agree with Casino that there's good reason to suspect Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
Britain has severe problems, but the public have no appetite for hard choices. Difficult things need to be done, but Starmer's approach is timid and betrays a lack of confidence. He hasn't done any of the work to prepare the public for difficult times that Cameron and Osborne did in advance of the 2010GE.
It's very easy to see Starmer and the Labour government becoming deeply unpopular very quickly. The difficult bit is, who do the voters turn to next?
There are lots of reasons to doubt a credible opposition emerging, but Starmer is showing that simply not being the incumbent government can sometimes be enough.
But, er, maybe Starmer will surprise on the upside?
I think Starmer does tough choices. Embracing Brexit for example in order to make Labour electable.
In the short term it may well make him unpopular, but there is a longer term benefit.
He also has a number of advantages, none of which are his doing:
1) starting at the right point in the economic cycle
2) immigration figures will drop markedly as fewer Hong Kong and Ukranians arrive, and student departures start to match Arrivals
3) waiting lists will start to fall as new capacity comes on line (ironically including Johnsons 40 hospitals)
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
That'll be "no, there aren't any data showing Labour down seven points in seven days", then.
It was posted on here earlier today or yesterday. No, I can't be arsed finding it. You can if you like.
You know I'm right. Hence the twitchy pedantry that avoids the substantive point.
Conclusion: you suspect I might be right and want to rapidly shut it down.
If you are right, that's interesting and important. But only if it's true.
Which is why I went to have a look... and I don't see any sign that it is true. If you've got something, great, bring it on. But I'm sure you respect us all enough to know that "it was posted here sometime, but I can't be bothered to find it" doesn't cut the mustard.
So 37 percent now, so the seven percent fall is from 44 percent. Which was on 28 May. So not seven days, but still a chunky fall. Maggie-to-Major was about a ten percent swing from memory.
But, there's some small print. New methodology from 1st June. There's been talk of it here.
We have tested the new approach over a number of waves of data, and on average it makes about three points difference to the lead (mostly at the expense of Labour, rather than aiding the Tories), and also increases the Liberal Democrats by about two points.
So that's about half the change there. And three points down... That sounds like Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven.
You work in engineering, don't you? You know to always check the small print- especially when the big print tell you what you want to be true.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
That'll be "no, there aren't any data showing Labour down seven points in seven days", then.
It was posted on here earlier today or yesterday. No, I can't be arsed finding it. You can if you like.
You know I'm right. Hence the twitchy pedantry that avoids the substantive point.
Conclusion: you suspect I might be right and want to rapidly shut it down.
If you are right, that's interesting and important. But only if it's true.
Which is why I went to have a look... and I don't see any sign that it is true. If you've got something, great, bring it on. But I'm sure you respect us all enough to know that "it was posted here sometime, but I can't be bothered to find it" doesn't cut the mustard.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
That'll be "no, there aren't any data showing Labour down seven points in seven days", then.
It was posted on here earlier today or yesterday. No, I can't be arsed finding it. You can if you like.
You know I'm right. Hence the twitchy pedantry that avoids the substantive point.
Conclusion: you suspect I might be right and want to rapidly shut it down.
If you are right, that's interesting and important. But only if it's true.
Which is why I went to have a look... and I don't see any sign that it is true. If you've got something, great, bring it on. But I'm sure you respect us all enough to know that "it was posted here sometime, but I can't be bothered to find it" doesn't cut the mustard.
So 37 percent now, so the seven percent fall is from 44 percent. Which was on 28 May. So not seven days, but still a chunky fall. Maggie-to-Major was about a ten percent swing from memory.
But, there's some small print. New methodology from 1st June. There's been talk of it here.
We have tested the new approach over a number of waves of data, and on average it makes about three points difference to the lead (mostly at the expense of Labour, rather than aiding the Tories), and also increases the Liberal Democrats by about two points.
So that's about half the change there. And three points down... That sounds like Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven.
You work in engineering, don't you? You know to always check the small print- especially when the big print tell you what you want to be true.
There has been a drop by seven, but it was in 14 days, numbers using the new methodology:
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
Bloody hell, patronising and wrong is a bad look. You are the mayor of Hiroshima surveying his patch and claiming that history does not support the view that one bomb can cause 150000 casualties, or Harold Shipman's defence team claiming that his claimed kill rate is 8 SDs out to the right of the distribution and therefore cannot be right. You don't do thought, you do a rather touching cargo cultist tribute to thought. Thank you, but it is really not quite as easy as it looks.
First it was Starmer needs a 12% swing, he's going to lose. Then it was level pegging is nothing during the midterm, Starmer is still going to lose. Then it was double figures are nothing, Labour needs to be 20% ahead, Starmer is going to lose. Then it was Labour are 20% ahead but when the Conservatives change the PM (again) that will soon change. Then it was Labour are 20% ahead but Sunak will go long and claw it back, Starmer hasn't won yet.
Tonight it's Starmer is only going to be a one term PM.
The electorate is going to get MORE volatile, not less. If you can overturn a 100 seat majority you can do 200. What’s more, the UNMENTIONABLE thing is about to overturn every economy on earth. We face unprecedented chaos
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
History also says that an 80-seat majority can't be overturned in one go. If people are fed up then party loyalty is going to drop.
Only one government in a century has been a single term, including through much bigger crises too.
British voters may be unenthusiastic but pretty much always are willing to give a government a second chance.
I wouldn't count on that, old fella.
There's a reasonable argument the Conservative majority elected in December 2019 has been desperately unfortunate. You can argue the pandemic and its aftermath as well as the war in Ukraine has served to create a strong anti-incumbency mood across much of Europe and further afield.
Many Governments of all stripes that had to deal with the pandemic have fallen so why should the British Government be immune from that? The answer is it isn't.
The key is rather how the governing party has comported itself while in office and while sleaze was the problem in 1997, this time its a different form of anger around how Government seemed to act more in the interests of its friends and allies than the wider public. That may be unfair but that's the impression and after 14 years there seems almost an arrogant belief among some Conservatives only they are fit to run the country.
Democracy doesn't allow for that degree of arrogance.
The truth is the Conservative Party can't rebuild until it has had a good kicking, until the public have expressed their anger through the ballot box. You know that.
At no point is anyone on the Conservative side offering any positive justification or reason for voting to keep the Party in power. It's all now waspish comments about supermajorities and the hardy perennial "he won't survive a term" - they said that about Blair and the final score was Blair 3 Tories 0.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
That'll be "no, there aren't any data showing Labour down seven points in seven days", then.
It was posted on here earlier today or yesterday. No, I can't be arsed finding it. You can if you like.
You know I'm right. Hence the twitchy pedantry that avoids the substantive point.
Conclusion: you suspect I might be right and want to rapidly shut it down.
If you are right, that's interesting and important. But only if it's true.
Which is why I went to have a look... and I don't see any sign that it is true. If you've got something, great, bring it on. But I'm sure you respect us all enough to know that "it was posted here sometime, but I can't be bothered to find it" doesn't cut the mustard.
So 37 percent now, so the seven percent fall is from 44 percent. Which was on 28 May. So not seven days, but still a chunky fall. Maggie-to-Major was about a ten percent swing from memory.
But, there's some small print. New methodology from 1st June. There's been talk of it here.
We have tested the new approach over a number of waves of data, and on average it makes about three points difference to the lead (mostly at the expense of Labour, rather than aiding the Tories), and also increases the Liberal Democrats by about two points.
So that's about half the change there. And three points down... That sounds like Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven.
You work in engineering, don't you? You know to always check the small print- especially when the big print tell you what you want to be true.
There has been a drop by seven, but it was in 14 days, numbers using the new methodology:
30th May - 44% 13th June - 37%
and if Casino had said that no-one would have said he was wrong.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
Yet Starmer's ratings have gone up recently. I think BeyondTopline may well be right that Labour's decrease in polling is largely being driven by Lab to LD tactical voters rather than dissatisfaction with Labour. A similar thing happened in 97.
It’s all he has left to console himself: the hope that the Labour Government will fail spectacularly and in record quick time.
Hmm, maybe, but have you considered I might also be right?
Look at recent polling: Labour's lead is as soft as babyfood (as @Leon said), entirely fuelled by uniting temporarily as an ejection mechanism for the existing administration and could rapidly splinter to Reform, Greens, the LDs and the Conservatives once in office.
How much more do Labour have to fall for Reform to start taking seats that Starmer has already banked?
If Nigey builds up a head of steam the Red Wall could fall like Dominoes. Then, Nigel's your uncle, Nigel is PM.
No, I'm getting ahead of myself there. I still think the reality is 8 out of 8 attempts and losses for Nige, this GE.
If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve. Just thought I’d make that clear.
But if one’s friends and colleagues insisted…..?
You’ll be relieved to hear that I’d be obliged to disappoint them.
First it was Starmer needs a 12% swing, he's going to lose. Then it was level pegging is nothing during the midterm, Starmer is still going to lose. Then it was double figures are nothing, Labour needs to be 20% ahead, Starmer is going to lose. Then it was Labour are 20% ahead but when the Conservatives change the PM (again) that will soon change. Then it was Labour are 20% ahead but Sunak will go long and claw it back, Starmer hasn't won yet.
Tonight it's Starmer is only going to be a one term PM.
Hey, it’s our stages of grief. Let us Tories have that and we will be equally considerate when Starmer has only half a term because Labour get rejected by a revolution for being useless.
Just got Yougoved for specifics of how I would vote in my constituency with the named candidates. I presume this is for a future MRP poll?
Mentioned that to Mrs Eek so she went to Yougov. Didn’t get that question just who out of the last 5 PMs is responsible for the current Tory situation.
A harder decision than you would expect as all hold some responsibility albeit May only because of her desire to fix social care
Yep I got that question. I put Sunak. Personally I believe that no matter how dire a situation you inherit there is always some scope to improve - perhaps even more so if the situation is really dire. The fact that Sunak has done nothing to improve things for the country as a wholeand has actually mangaed to make them worse says everything I need to know about him.
He did do things to improve things for the country, just not sexy big things. He regained the trust of the markets - whether you like it or not it’s vital - he stabilised a potentially out of control economic situation, he improved relations with Europe - Windsor framework, personal relations with European leaders (he does by all accounts have a very good personal relationship with Macron and Meloni, and is appreciated by others) especially after the Boris years.
We were absolutely in a mess when he took over and he did things that the man on the street will never appreciate but in the long term they improved the country from what he took over. He was never in a position to start driving any vision because he was cleaning up an absolute mess.
You cannot believe this utter tripe. He was Chancellor of the Exchequer for much of the 'mess' you describe. He hasn't 'stabilised' the economy, the economy is actually now in a brittle state where it cannot return to growth without it causing inflation and the Bank of England punishing it with interest rate rises - the only way out of that buzzwire game is to increase supply, which can bring growth without inflation, and he's done nothing to increase supply, of homes, of energy, of food, or of anything else except boat people.
As for 'driving any vision' - if he had any long term vision, it would be in the manifesto - though whether anyone found such a document from him believable is another matter of course - but there's no vision in the manifesto. It doesn't even envisage a reduction of the tax burden. He has nothing to offer but being a helpless passenger on the bus of British decline, but in some indefinable way suggesting he will 'do it better' than SKS, when all the available evidence suggests he is worse in every particular.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
History also says that an 80-seat majority can't be overturned in one go. If people are fed up then party loyalty is going to drop.
Only one government in a century has been a single term, including through much bigger crises too.
British voters may be unenthusiastic but pretty much always are willing to give a government a second chance.
The electorate is going to get MORE volatile, not less. If you can overturn a 100 seat majority you can do 200. What’s more, the UNMENTIONABLE thing is about to overturn every economy on earth. We face unprecedented chaos
I agree that the future is more uncertain than for at least 70 years which makes Casino's cast iron certainty that if there is a Labour government it will be only in for one term seem silly. I'm not even prepared to claim with that level of confidence that there will even be a Labour government yet.
First it was Starmer needs a 12% swing, he's going to lose. Then it was level pegging is nothing during the midterm, Starmer is still going to lose. Then it was double figures are nothing, Labour needs to be 20% ahead, Starmer is going to lose. Then it was Labour are 20% ahead but when the Conservatives change the PM (again) that will soon change. Then it was Labour are 20% ahead but Sunak will go long and claw it back, Starmer hasn't won yet.
Tonight it's Starmer is only going to be a one term PM.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
I find these hyper-defensive posts absolutely fascinating. Reams of them as soon as I dare suggest SKS is an empty vessel built on sand that is going to rapidly fall apart.
Absolutely no-one wants to hear that this side of the election precisely because they are very worried about it.
That'll be "no, there aren't any data showing Labour down seven points in seven days", then.
It was posted on here earlier today or yesterday. No, I can't be arsed finding it. You can if you like.
You know I'm right. Hence the twitchy pedantry that avoids the substantive point.
Conclusion: you suspect I might be right and want to rapidly shut it down.
If you are right, that's interesting and important. But only if it's true.
Which is why I went to have a look... and I don't see any sign that it is true. If you've got something, great, bring it on. But I'm sure you respect us all enough to know that "it was posted here sometime, but I can't be bothered to find it" doesn't cut the mustard.
So 37 percent now, so the seven percent fall is from 44 percent. Which was on 28 May. So not seven days, but still a chunky fall. Maggie-to-Major was about a ten percent swing from memory.
But, there's some small print. New methodology from 1st June. There's been talk of it here.
We have tested the new approach over a number of waves of data, and on average it makes about three points difference to the lead (mostly at the expense of Labour, rather than aiding the Tories), and also increases the Liberal Democrats by about two points.
So that's about half the change there. And three points down... That sounds like Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven.
You work in engineering, don't you? You know to always check the small print- especially when the big print tell you what you want to be true.
There has been a drop by seven, but it was in 14 days, numbers using the new methodology:
30th May - 44% 13th June - 37%
and if Casino had said that no-one would have said he was wrong.
7 points in 7 days, perhaps Casino was taking some artistic license? It certainly got everyone talking about it.
For those adamant that Sir Keir will simply be keeping the seat warm for Nigel and Suella, it's probably worth remembering that there was much talk on here that Dave would only lead a one-term government too, so screwed was the country by the banking crisis that no party could fail to be hounded out of office in its wake.
Life is very easy for them, mind. The rest of us have been having to remember in recent days Was it us at Juno and the Yanks at Omaha, or the other way round? Not a problem for Johnny Hun.
Left foot studs up while he went for the ball with the right foot. Stupid challenge for 2024. The referee wouldn't even have stopped the game in Argentina '78.
Double Jeopardy though with a red card and penalty. A yellow would be fair.
I agree, but letter of the law is studs on ankle red card. Shin pads and no cards back in our day!
Two footed sliding tackle in the box was always a red at this level. Well, since I’ve been watching from the late 80s.
I suggest you watch Don Revie's Leeds squad from 1971 or Johnny Giles' promotion winning West Brom side from 1976.
Heh. Yeah before my time sadly. But have seen the Brian Clough views on that Leeds side. “You won them all by cheating”.
They really did.
Big Jack, Bremner, Norman Hunter, Johnny Giles were all absolutely dirty barsteward, but then Leeds weren't alone, Bryan Kidd, Alan Ball, Francis Lee, Nobby Styles were very dirty too.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
Just had a bit of Youtube music on in the background, a mediaeval tune called Merrie Summer ilast came up on the playlist...
I just casually saw a comment from @ReformUk, logo and all; "It is imperative that British culture and history be preserved, especially in these times".
Except the song was being sung by a Polish mediaeval group and was recorded in a church in Gdynia.
Its not just the stupid racism that makes these people such twats. Its the stupid stupid.
Have you verified that none of the members of the group support PiS? Perhaps they deserve your condemnation too.
The Poles were just singing- rather well- in middle english. Not a likely hotbed for PiS to be fair.
Sorry to shatter your illusions but it looks likely that the founder of the group you were listening to is an activist for the former Polish Sovereignty League, now Patriotic Movement.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
Do you not see how quoting historical precedents is useful, but not a slam dunk given the distant lack of precedented times since 2015?
Things are more in flux.
Consider that on these boundaries you are currently watching an adjusted Tory majority of over 100 completely reversed.
I wonder, will a Labour government decide to ‘revise’ many or all of the recent changes to the electoral system.
It would be good to see them dumping the stupid ID requirements for in person voting but also tighten the rules on postal voting. These are easy things to do which require little time or money but which would be worth doing because they are 'right' for democracy.
Voter's who have stepped this side of the White Cliffs of Dover for the last half century can f*** off too!
The electorate is going to get MORE volatile, not less. If you can overturn a 100 seat majority you can do 200. What’s more, the UNMENTIONABLE thing is about to overturn every economy on earth. We face unprecedented chaos
Ah... you playing with your unmentionables again. You know its not good for you. Get the nurse to give you some more valium
Mind you, of course there will be continued volatility, which will certainly keep us on our toes.
The electorate is going to get MORE volatile, not less. If you can overturn a 100 seat majority you can do 200. What’s more, the UNMENTIONABLE thing is about to overturn every economy on earth. We face unprecedented chaos
This GE isn't some great movement of thought by the electorate though. Nothing like it. We've not moved really at all.
The volatility is created by ALL of the political parties failing to offer something worth voting for.
Mostly this GE is about the clear vacuum in the Tory party.
I doubt many are really enthused by the prospect of voting for Starmer, but he's the best of bad choices. And some may vote Reform, because Farage is not an evil empire waiting to happen, but just a guy that wants to speak his mind and is worth listening to. (Reform more generally seem very odd)
The FPtP system could well deliver an outlandish result for Labour. Even if it does it won't be any sign of chaos ahead.
Life is very easy for them, mind. The rest of us have been having to remember in recent days Was it us at Juno and the Yanks at Omaha, or the other way round? Not a problem for Johnny Hun.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
Disagree with nearly everything you've written, but interesting anyway.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
History also says that an 80-seat majority can't be overturned in one go. If people are fed up then party loyalty is going to drop.
Only one government in a century has been a single term, including through much bigger crises too.
British voters may be unenthusiastic but pretty much always are willing to give a government a second chance.
I am not sure that is true.
Since 1924 we have had
Baldwin Tory 1 term 1924 - 1929 Heath Tory 1 term 1970 - 1974
and although stretching it a little because of the two elections in 1974,
Labour is now explicitly ruling out putting Capital Gains Tax on people’s main homes.
Labour spokesman: “No. Labour will not introduce capital gains taxes on primary residences. It’s a bad idea.”
===
Of course they are. It is electoral suicide.
But would be an excellent idea to reduce the insanity in the housing market. And would be a much fairer tax than stamp duty as it would be levied on the profits made by the seller.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
Super post. I would add. If you despise, defund and denigrate public services, as lazy, unproductive and overpaid, then the millions who work for them won't even consider voting for you. Let alone vote for you. Cameron won teachers. Teachers!!! In 2010.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
I think you are right. Conservatives have withdrawn from the institutions of state.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
Super post. I would add. If you despise, defund and denigrate public services, as lazy, unproductive and overpaid, then the millions who work for them won't even consider voting for you. Let alone vote for you. Cameron won teachers. Teachers!!! In 2010.
- I think it’s rather sad that the only way you can deal with the present is to imagine / hope for a future that is so uncertain
- History doesn’t support your view that a (let’s say) 150 seat majority can be overturned in one term. So, realistically, if (IF) Labour take a 150+ seat maj then will be in power for 9-10 years minimum
- They, and the country, start from such a low base (as does your party) that I think you are detaching yourself from the reality of what is taking place as a psychological device. It’s a flight reaction.
History also says that an 80-seat majority can't be overturned in one go. If people are fed up then party loyalty is going to drop.
Only one government in a century has been a single term, including through much bigger crises too.
British voters may be unenthusiastic but pretty much always are willing to give a government a second chance.
I am not sure that is true.
Since 1924 we have had
Baldwin Tory 1 term 1924 - 1929 Heath Tory 1 term 1970 - 1974
and although stretching it a little because of the two elections in 1974,
Wilson/Callaghan Labour 1 term 1974 -1979
OK, 95 years, not a century! And Wilson won two elections, so two terms in 74, albeit one rather short.
For those adamant that Sir Keir will simply be keeping the seat warm for Nigel and Suella, it's probably worth remembering that there was much talk on here that Dave would only lead a one-term government too, so screwed was the country by the banking crisis that no party could fail to be hounded out of office in its wake.
Did Cameron make it to 14 months into his second term? Maybe it was fourteen-and-a-half? That's not exactly a roaring success as a precedent.
And, much as I have my criticisms of Cameron, oh so many criticisms, he did a lot to prepare the country for tough times. People are going to vote for change, and if they don't see it they are going to be mighty pissed.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
Super post. I would add. If you despise, defund and denigrate public services, as lazy, unproductive and overpaid, then the millions who work for them won't even consider voting for you. Let alone vote for you. Cameron won teachers. Teachers!!! In 2010.
Defund public services?
The state of this.
Come work in them. Then we'll talk. State of you. How else would you describe a zero increase in SEN per pupil funding since 2010? That's actual. Not real terms.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
I think you are right. Conservatives have withdrawn from the institutions of state.
That's been going on for ages.
Must find my copy of Alan Clark's "The Tories". Two points I remember from it. One is the comment that every Conservative leader ends up hating the party they led. (And that was before Hague, IDS, Howard, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak.) The other was that Thatcher did have an opportunity in the mid to late 80s to get the public sector intelligensia/professionals on side. Don't remember the details, and I bet the book is now too well hidden. But The Lady had that chance, but she blew it.
Just had a bit of Youtube music on in the background, a mediaeval tune called Merrie Summer ilast came up on the playlist...
I just casually saw a comment from @ReformUk, logo and all; "It is imperative that British culture and history be preserved, especially in these times".
Except the song was being sung by a Polish mediaeval group and was recorded in a church in Gdynia.
Its not just the stupid racism that makes these people such twats. Its the stupid stupid.
Have you verified that none of the members of the group support PiS? Perhaps they deserve your condemnation too.
The Poles were just singing- rather well- in middle english. Not a likely hotbed for PiS to be fair.
Sorry to shatter your illusions but it looks likely that the founder of the group you were listening to is an activist for the former Polish Sovereignty League, now Patriotic Movement.
Labour is now explicitly ruling out putting Capital Gains Tax on people’s main homes.
Labour spokesman: “No. Labour will not introduce capital gains taxes on primary residences. It’s a bad idea.”
===
Of course they are. It is electoral suicide.
But would be an excellent idea to reduce the insanity in the housing market. And would be a much fairer tax than stamp duty as it would be levied on the profits made by the seller.
It is an excellent idea, but would indeed be electoral suicide.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
Super post. I would add. If you despise, defund and denigrate public services, as lazy, unproductive and overpaid, then the millions who work for them won't even consider voting for you. Let alone vote for you. Cameron won teachers. Teachers!!! In 2010.
Defund public services?
The state of this.
Come work in them. Then we'll talk. State of you. How else would you describe a zero increase in SEN per pupil funding since 2010? That's actual. Not real terms.
How would you describe the highest level of taxation as a % of GDP since the 1960s? You can say that the money given to public services is being poorly deployed - I'd be the first to agree with you. But underfunded THEY AIN'T.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
I think you are right. Conservatives have withdrawn from the institutions of state.
That's been going on for ages.
Must find my copy of Alan Clark's "The Tories". Two points I remember from it. One is the comment that every Conservative leader ends up hating the party they led. (And that was before Hague, IDS, Howard, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak.) The other was that Thatcher did have an opportunity in the mid to late 80s to get the public sector intelligensia/professionals on side. Don't remember the details, and I bet the book is now too well hidden. But The Lady had that chance, but she blew it.
Nobody hates the Tories more than the Tories themselves.
Wasn't that Argentina 1978 when Willie Johnston was sent home in disgrace?
I, for one, have been blasting out Del Amitri’s “Don’t Come Home Too Soon” all evening.
Glasgow rock bands are sadly as good at failing as Scottish football teams. Aztec camera, del Amitri, Fratellis. In the latter 2 cases football anthems seem to be the kiss of death.
I tend to agree with Casino that there's good reason to suspect Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
Britain has severe problems, but the public have no appetite for hard choices. Difficult things need to be done, but Starmer's approach is timid and betrays a lack of confidence. He hasn't done any of the work to prepare the public for difficult times that Cameron and Osborne did in advance of the 2010GE.
It's very easy to see Starmer and the Labour government becoming deeply unpopular very quickly. The difficult bit is, who do the voters turn to next?
There are lots of reasons to doubt a credible opposition emerging, but Starmer is showing that simply not being the incumbent government can sometimes be enough.
But, er, maybe Starmer will surprise on the upside?
Tend to agree with this assessment. However. Events could play a part too. An end to the conflicts in Ukraine and Palestine. Comedic turmoil preventing any kind of opposition narrative to form. Gradual, consistent, if slow, growth. A determination to hammer the previous government's record can last a decade or more. There's plenty of material.
The chances of peace in palestine or ukraine are pretty much zero as is growth
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
I think you are right. Conservatives have withdrawn from the institutions of state.
That's been going on for ages.
Must find my copy of Alan Clark's "The Tories". Two points I remember from it. One is the comment that every Conservative leader ends up hating the party they led. (And that was before Hague, IDS, Howard, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak.) The other was that Thatcher did have an opportunity in the mid to late 80s to get the public sector intelligensia/professionals on side. Don't remember the details, and I bet the book is now too well hidden. But The Lady had that chance, but she blew it.
Cameron managed to get some sections of the public sector onside. In 2010 he won teachers and doctors.
Public services are almost intrinsically small c conservative. Teachers, health professionals, police, prisons, civil service are intrinsically reluctant to change. The big C Conservatives are actively hostile to them.
Prediction: Starmer will be a one-term Prime Minister.
This is not going to be a one term majority. The electorate has become more volatile, but they are not going back to the Tories anytime soon..
You might be right though and Crazy Ed Davey will beat Starmer in 2028 with a Rejoin manifesto.
He's dropped 7 points in 7 days.
His coalition is fraying before he's even in office.
Think about it.
I'd be interested to see your workings there.
Going from the wikipedia table: Techne -1 (44 to 43) YouGov -4 (41 to 37) R+W flat (42 to 42) WeThink -2 (45 to 43) Whitestone -1 (42 to 41) BMG -1 (42 to 41)...
Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven. And as long as voters to the right of the Liberal Democrats remain split, it barely matters.
What can you expect from Tories apart from making things up?
Tories. The Tories! The Tories. The Tories.The Tories! The TORIES! THE Tories. THE TORIES. *The Tories* The. Tories. TORIES. Tories. Tories. THE TORIES. *THE TORRRIIEESS!!*
It's all you have.
We don't need much.
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
Super post. I would add. If you despise, defund and denigrate public services, as lazy, unproductive and overpaid, then the millions who work for them won't even consider voting for you. Let alone vote for you. Cameron won teachers. Teachers!!! In 2010.
Defund public services?
The state of this.
After 14 years of Tory rule, the population has increased by 5 million, the number of police officers is broadly the same.
Comments
Waiting lists are probably going to head down next year as the post-pandemic plays itself out a bit.
That'll help.
However. Events could play a part too.
An end to the conflicts in Ukraine and Palestine. Comedic turmoil preventing any kind of opposition narrative to form.
Gradual, consistent, if slow, growth.
A determination to hammer the previous government's record can last a decade or more. There's plenty of material.
Just thought I’d make that clear.
British voters may be unenthusiastic but pretty much always are willing to give a government a second chance.
If people want the party of power out, they will find a way to do so.
I think it’s probable Labour get at least 2 terms, based on historical precedent. But we can’t with any certainty predict the result of an election 5 years from now. We don’t even know what the opposition will look like right now, and what form it will take.
Starmer has proved he’s ruthless with his internal critics, I’ll give him that. He’s put together a “don’t scare the horses” electoral programme which has convinced people he will somehow fix things without charging them an extra penny in tax.
And he’s done all this in the face of the most inept Government in living memory. Ok, maybe that’s not so much of an achievement.
From 4th July it’s all on him. Having Sue Gray as your enforcer doesn’t magic up any extra money when you’ve pledged yourself to Tory spending limits, a bit of a tweak to CGT aside. The doctors want paying. So do the train drivers. Ok, let’s tax Mr £100m Tesco boss a bit more? Whoops. We promised not to do that. Now Ukraine needs some armaments. Shall we cancel the 0.7 of a planning officer we’ve promised to every district council? What do you mean that’s not going to raise enough?
Starmer’s lead on the supposition that Labour will fix things is the very definition of hopium. I’m going to be delighted to see Sunak out on his ear just because such pure incompetence deserves to be rewarded, but I’m under no illusions Britain’s government is going to get any better.
You and @Casino_Royale may be right and we are moving into a period of extreme political volatility - I'm not completely convinced but I understand the argument.
As we don't know what will happen on July 4th, we can only speculate. I think two terms won't be unreasonable but Governments and Prime Ministers have a shelf life - both Thatcher and Blair arguably could and should have gone earlier but events, dear boy, events as someone once said.
I recall the concensus being Thatcher wouldn't last long whereas Johnson was going to be in for a decade or more.
Life makes fools of us all eventually.
As for 'driving any vision' - if he had any long term vision, it would be in the manifesto - though whether anyone found such a document from him believable is another matter of course - but there's no vision in the manifesto. It doesn't even envisage a reduction of the tax burden. He has nothing to offer but being a helpless passenger on the bus of British decline, but in some indefinable way suggesting he will 'do it better' than SKS, when all the available evidence suggests he is worse in every particular.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4835503#Comment_4835503
I was close!
It is this very lack of any enthusiasm, which Casino rightly identifies, which makes surprising on the upside much more likely.
Success = performance - expectations.
So 37 percent now, so the seven percent fall is from 44 percent. Which was on 28 May. So not seven days, but still a chunky fall. Maggie-to-Major was about a ten percent swing from memory.
But, there's some small print. New methodology from 1st June. There's been talk of it here.
And there's this, from the horse's mouth:
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49626-general-election-2024-how-have-our-methodology-changes-affected-voting-intention
We have tested the new approach over a number of waves of data, and on average it makes about three points difference to the lead (mostly at the expense of Labour, rather than aiding the Tories), and also increases the Liberal Democrats by about two points.
So that's about half the change there. And three points down... That sounds like Labour are consistently down, sure. But not by seven.
You work in engineering, don't you? You know to always check the small print- especially when the big print tell you what you want to be true.
30th May - 46%
4th June - 40% (which would have been 45% on the old methodology)
6th June - 41%
11th June - 38%
13th June - 37%
Can you spot a seven point drop in seven days even if you ignore the change of methodology. No, you can't.
In the short term it may well make him unpopular, but there is a longer term benefit.
He also has a number of advantages, none of which are his doing:
1) starting at the right point in the economic cycle
2) immigration figures will drop markedly as fewer Hong Kong and Ukranians arrive, and student departures start to match Arrivals
3) waiting lists will start to fall as new capacity comes on line (ironically including Johnsons 40 hospitals)
4) Gaza war ends, at least for a while.
30th May - 44%
13th June - 37%
Then it was level pegging is nothing during the midterm, Starmer is still going to lose.
Then it was double figures are nothing, Labour needs to be 20% ahead, Starmer is going to lose.
Then it was Labour are 20% ahead but when the Conservatives change the PM (again) that will soon change.
Then it was Labour are 20% ahead but Sunak will go long and claw it back, Starmer hasn't won yet.
Tonight it's Starmer is only going to be a one term PM.
The electorate is going to get MORE volatile, not less. If you can overturn a 100 seat majority you can do 200. What’s more, the UNMENTIONABLE thing is about to overturn every economy on earth. We face unprecedented chaos
Many Governments of all stripes that had to deal with the pandemic have fallen so why should the British Government be immune from that? The answer is it isn't.
The key is rather how the governing party has comported itself while in office and while sleaze was the problem in 1997, this time its a different form of anger around how Government seemed to act more in the interests of its friends and allies than the wider public. That may be unfair but that's the impression and after 14 years there seems almost an arrogant belief among some Conservatives only they are fit to run the country.
Democracy doesn't allow for that degree of arrogance.
The truth is the Conservative Party can't rebuild until it has had a good kicking, until the public have expressed their anger through the ballot box. You know that.
At no point is anyone on the Conservative side offering any positive justification or reason for voting to keep the Party in power. It's all now waspish comments about supermajorities and the hardy perennial "he won't survive a term" - they said that about Blair and the final score was Blair 3 Tories 0.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52416192
1 booking!
I wonder on here occasionally how we got here with left liberal bastions across society, what you would deem woke. How and when did the BBC go from high Tory patricians to metropolitan liberal, to being defended by the left and attacked by the right, how and when health & safety went from mustached NCO types insisting on surnames to wet lefties fussing about conkers. And HR, and all those other things.
Did the left storm the gates, wave their critical race theory, insist it was their world. I don't think so. I think the right's withdrawal from public administration, now reaching its denouement, is instructive.
Step by step the patricians, then the Thatcherites, then the cosplay post-Thatcherites simply withdrew from areas of the public sphere they felt beneath them, were not the thing for a right leaning person to do. If state spending was bad, what was the point of actually running, directing, administering things when in office. Why govern at all? It is beneath you.
And the point of Starmer is simply this and the Labour manifesto says nothing it it doesn't say this - we will take administration seriously and that is differentiation enough.
I don't know if the Conservative party has a way back from recusing itself from government in such a flamboyant way, with not even the modest depth of Starmer to call upon. What does this revived Tory party look like and where does it come from.
http://www.elblag.net/artykuly/liga-obrony-suwerennosci-wystartuje-w-wyborach-ma-juz-program,4042.htm
Mind you, of course there will be continued volatility, which will certainly keep us on our toes.
The volatility is created by ALL of the political parties failing to offer something worth voting for.
Mostly this GE is about the clear vacuum in the Tory party.
I doubt many are really enthused by the prospect of voting for Starmer, but he's the best of bad choices. And some may vote Reform, because Farage is not an evil empire waiting to happen, but just a guy that wants to speak his mind and is worth listening to. (Reform more generally seem very odd)
The FPtP system could well deliver an outlandish result for Labour. Even if it does it won't be any sign of chaos ahead.
Since 1924 we have had
Baldwin Tory 1 term 1924 - 1929
Heath Tory 1 term 1970 - 1974
and although stretching it a little because of the two elections in 1974,
Wilson/Callaghan Labour 1 term 1974 -1979
I would add.
If you despise, defund and denigrate public services, as lazy, unproductive and overpaid, then the millions who work for them won't even consider voting for you. Let alone vote for you.
Cameron won teachers. Teachers!!! In 2010.
The state of this.
And, much as I have my criticisms of Cameron, oh so many criticisms, he did a lot to prepare the country for tough times. People are going to vote for change, and if they don't see it they are going to be mighty pissed.
Then we'll talk.
State of you.
How else would you describe a zero increase in SEN per pupil funding since 2010?
That's actual. Not real terms.
Must find my copy of Alan Clark's "The Tories". Two points I remember from it. One is the comment that every Conservative leader ends up hating the party they led. (And that was before Hague, IDS, Howard, Cameron, May, Johnson, Truss and Sunak.) The other was that Thatcher did have an opportunity in the mid to late 80s to get the public sector intelligensia/professionals on side. Don't remember the details, and I bet the book is now too well hidden. But The Lady had that chance, but she blew it.
He's 61.
Public services are almost intrinsically small c conservative. Teachers, health professionals, police, prisons, civil service are intrinsically reluctant to change. The big C Conservatives are actively hostile to them.