So we have two streams of polling - the 'adjusted' and the 'unadjusted'. I would be betting in line with the former. When Opinium and Survation put out polls with almost identical results it will take some persuading to get me to ignore them. The issue may now be those undecided ex-Cons who finally decide to poll. Will they vote to save the current incarnation of their old party or will they vote to destroy it. A lot of them seem minded to do the latter and Reform is a handy non-Bolshevik weapon to use
What is noticable is that, while some pollsters have very different figures for Con & Ref, the direction of travel between polls is fairly universal.
This is the stat that should terrify Tories. The last poll that showed a VI rise for them compared to the previous comparable poll by that company (so no MRP vs normal etc) was More In Common on June 3rd, 40 polls ago. Just noise should have made that impossible. That's terminal unless it switches like now, their vote is disintegrating.
Leicester East is a crazy seat, but I really wouldn't bet on Labour at current odds.
The Labour East constituency party is faction ridden, and the suppression of the attempted putsch by Labour councillors against Mayor Soulsby last year has left a lot of ill feeling and created the One Leicester Party. I don't think Webbe has any real support as she has been a useless and absent MP. It is also one of the country's most Hindu seats, and one of the few where Sunak is popular.
The politics is internecine and opaque, but I reckon on a 3 way battle between Lab, Con and Vaz. Stop laughing at the back but Vaz is very popular there and ran a patronage programme that owes him lots of favours.
I reckon a narrow Lab win but either Con or Vaz could win. I got on Vaz at 41, but the current 29 is still value.
What’s Vaz actually campaigning on locally? Him as a local MP?
Mostly, and a bit on Gaza and Yemen, mixed with local boosterism and criticism of the mayor.
His campaign video has 61 000 views, quite a lot for an independent.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
There is a weird view that pro-Brexit = ultra right wing. Pro-EU, = Centrist.
Yes it’s bizarre. Take Boris. You can call him a liar, a fraud and a charlatan. You can call him lazy or even corrupt. But I don’t really understand anyone placing him on the right of the Tory party. He made common cause with many of them over Brexit, but that’s it.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 27 points in our latest poll. Con 19% (-2) Lab 46% (-) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Reform 16% (+4) SNP 2% (-2) Green 5% (-) Other 1% (-1) Fieldwork: 14th - 17th June 2024 Sample: 1,383 GB adults (Changes from 6th - 8th June 2024)
I'm just so glad Rishi called an early election to wrongfoot Reform.
The best call since the Earl of Cardigan at Sevastapol*.
*or whomever is best placed to be blamed.
I can only conclude that Labour are absolutely fucking brilliant at placing plants ready to play the long game.
I've heard three theories from reliable sources on why Rishi went for July, I'll only discuss two of them.
1) He has had enough of the criticism and realised if he went in July or November the result would be largely the same
2) He was worried about an Oct/Nov election getting entangled with the US election. We all know some Tories will back Trump, which is a vote loser, then you've got Trump commentating on the election which could be messy.
I not only predicted 4th July, so it couldn’t come as a complete shock to PBers, but I told you all the reasoning as to why in the weeks and months before they even started reasoning it for themselves.
Waiting for interest rate cut had run out of road, this meant mortgage and re-mortgage pain all up to autumn election. July and summer would bring not only surge to a record of Channel crossings, but none of the long promised covid flights as it got bogged down in courts. A Covid report, to put the “after that how can we trust you ever again?” on voters lips in time for autumn campaign. Autumn also brings higher energy prices and food prices, and inflation creeping back up. It could also mean a party conference, and a fiscal event for which there was no money left for rabbits from the pre election hat, at least not in these days of the OBR, the so called headroom Hunt had invented, he had already maxxed out.
They are not bright this Tory top team - Sunak’s switch to now fighting on individual freedom and aspiration for working families in his hustings speeches this week, wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t told him to do that on PB. Tory’s are making this campaign up as they go along, from reading PB and cribbing from my posts in particular.
You also predicted May.
Now people like me tipped July at 20s.
Can you boast of such a tip?
You put money on July at 20's?
Your name will go on ze list!
I am already on many lists.
I know when a revolution comes, be it a far right one or a hard left one, I will be one of the first people lined up against a wall.
This is the stat that should terrify Tories. The last poll that showed a VI rise for them compared to the previous comparable poll by that company (so no MRP vs normal etc) was More In Common on June 3rd, 40 polls ago. Just noise should have made that impossible. That's terminal unless it switches like now, their vote is disintegrating.
I’ll vote Conservative if there’s any point, but not, if it’s a wasted vote.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
There is a weird view that pro-Brexit = ultra right wing. Pro-EU, = Centrist.
Pro-EU = loyal to Dave Pro-Brexit = an awful knave
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 27 points in our latest poll. Con 19% (-2) Lab 46% (-) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Reform 16% (+4) SNP 2% (-2) Green 5% (-) Other 1% (-1) Fieldwork: 14th - 17th June 2024 Sample: 1,383 GB adults (Changes from 6th - 8th June 2024)
Tories getting stepmomed.
But look at that SNP score. Ahem.
Yes. Baxtered, using the Scottish subsample, gives this seat distribution. CON 27 LAB 546 LDM 49 PC 4 RFM 3 OTH 2 GRN 1 NI 18 SNP 0 Exceptionally silly. But the Panda memes create themselves.
Struggle to see what the point of a Cameron Return would be - what would a Cameron-led Tory party offer that would be substantially different to either the Labour or Lib Dem offer in 2024?
Have Deltapoll changed their methodology? They’ve gone from being almost the best pollster for the Tories to being the worst.
Sunak was -12 from last time on personal ratings in this one so it's possible they just hit a very anti Sunak vein as the others had low but steady ratings for him. But they've been getting steadily worse for Tories throughout the campaign
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
There is a weird view that pro-Brexit = ultra right wing. Pro-EU, = Centrist.
Yes it’s bizarre. Take Boris. You can call him a liar, a fraud and a charlatan. You can call him lazy or even corrupt. But I don’t really understand anyone placing him on the right of the Tory party. He made common cause with many of them over Brexit, but that’s it.
It's amazing how many people seem genuinely surprised to discover that immigration has been running at record levels since Boris became PM.
So we have two streams of polling - the 'adjusted' and the 'unadjusted'. I would be betting in line with the former. When Opinium and Survation put out polls with almost identical results it will take some persuading to get me to ignore them. The issue may now be those undecided ex-Cons who finally decide to poll. Will they vote to save the current incarnation of their old party or will they vote to destroy it. A lot of them seem minded to do the latter and Reform is a handy non-Bolshevik weapon to use
What is noticable is that, while some pollsters have very different figures for Con & Ref, the direction of travel between polls is fairly universal.
If I was to be sceptical of anything in the polls (and this site has taught me not to be - or at least not to bet based on polls being “wrong” with no evidence), it would be that. The Tory/Reform split. There are some new variables in there that might mess with sampling.
Similarly, if I were to query seat projections (and I have learnt not to on this site) then it would be over Reform totals once they go over a given percentage and the modelling is trying to cope with something genuinely new.
EXCLUSIVE: Gossip is flying round senior Tory circles that David Cameron is planning to return to the Commons in an early by-election in autumn or spring. And then he will become the "One Nation" group's next leadership contender ⬇️
Have Deltapoll changed their methodology? They’ve gone from being almost the best pollster for the Tories to being the worst.
I hadn't noticed that but it's a marked move. The last seven Deltapolls since the beginning of May have shown Labour leads of: 17, 18, 22, 22, 23, 25 and now 27%.
Leicester East is a crazy seat, but I really wouldn't bet on Labour at current odds.
The Labour East constituency party is faction ridden, and the suppression of the attempted putsch by Labour councillors against Mayor Soulsby last year has left a lot of ill feeling and created the One Leicester Party. I don't think Webbe has any real support as she has been a useless and absent MP. It is also one of the country's most Hindu seats, and one of the few where Sunak is popular.
The politics is internecine and opaque, but I reckon on a 3 way battle between Lab, Con and Vaz. Stop laughing at the back but Vaz is very popular there and ran a patronage programme that owes him lots of favours.
I reckon a narrow Lab win but either Con or Vaz could win. I got on Vaz at 41, but the current 29 is still value.
What’s Vaz actually campaigning on locally? Him as a local MP?
Foxy is right on the money here - but I suspect a big lead among non-Hindu voters will get Lab home. Not all Hindus are Cons and I can say from anecdotal experience that not all Hindu Cons have time for Mr Sunak. There will be a Reform vote there.ii
Yes, Lab, Con, Reform and an independent are all Hindu, so spoilt for choice. Vaz is Catholic, but with broad appeal and following in other Asian communities.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 27 points in our latest poll. Con 19% (-2) Lab 46% (-) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Reform 16% (+4) SNP 2% (-2) Green 5% (-) Other 1% (-1) Fieldwork: 14th - 17th June 2024 Sample: 1,383 GB adults (Changes from 6th - 8th June 2024)
I'm just so glad Rishi called an early election to wrongfoot Reform.
The best call since the Earl of Cardigan at Sevastapol*.
*or whomever is best placed to be blamed.
I can only conclude that Labour are absolutely fucking brilliant at placing plants ready to play the long game.
I've heard three theories from reliable sources on why Rishi went for July, I'll only discuss two of them.
1) He has had enough of the criticism and realised if he went in July or November the result would be largely the same
2) He was worried about an Oct/Nov election getting entangled with the US election. We all know some Tories will back Trump, which is a vote loser, then you've got Trump commentating on the election which could be messy.
I not only predicted 4th July, so it couldn’t come as a complete shock to PBers, but I told you all the reasoning as to why in the weeks and months before they even started reasoning it for themselves.
Waiting for interest rate cut had run out of road, this meant mortgage and re-mortgage pain all up to autumn election. July and summer would bring not only surge to a record of Channel crossings, but none of the long promised covid flights as it got bogged down in courts. A Covid report, to put the “after that how can we trust you ever again?” on voters lips in time for autumn campaign. Autumn also brings higher energy prices and food prices, and inflation creeping back up. It could also mean a party conference, and a fiscal event for which there was no money left for rabbits from the pre election hat, at least not in these days of the OBR, the so called headroom Hunt had invented, he had already maxxed out.
They are not bright this Tory top team - Sunak’s switch to now fighting on individual freedom and aspiration for working families in his hustings speeches this week, wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t told him to do that on PB. Tory’s are making this campaign up as they go along, from reading PB and cribbing from my posts in particular.
You also predicted May.
Now people like me tipped July at 20s.
Can you boast of such a tip?
I analysed it down to 2 days. One Sunak actually called it on. The other one you say I got wrong, he SHOULD have held it on.
Does it not seem odd to smash your councillor base, depress your party and boost all your opponents to look like winners by proving that you really are that far behind… and then call the early election, or Snappy Lec as history books will call it.
You and 90% of PB were still insisting it’s Autumn when I first posted July 4th.
As to who called what first, how you replied when I first said July 4th, who came up with Dutch Salute first, called the end of Thangham first, the truth is always there on PB with a simple search. For ever and ever.
This is the stat that should terrify Tories. The last poll that showed a VI rise for them compared to the previous comparable poll by that company (so no MRP vs normal etc) was More In Common on June 3rd, 40 polls ago. Just noise should have made that impossible. That's terminal unless it switches like now, their vote is disintegrating.
I’ll vote Conservative if there’s any point, but not, if it’s a wasted vote.
Depends which polling you think is closer to reality. They're screwed, but how screwed?
Maybe the delusional Reform manifesto might make a few think is this party really all that serious. The Tories seem to be avoiding going after Reform apart from saying they’re Labour enablers .
Men read military history; women read romantic fiction
Men fancy themselves as soldiers; women imagine themselves as beauties
Both are fantasies, both are eternal, both are corrosively intoxicating
Four things better than all things are: Women and horses, power and war.
Kipling R.
Kipling changed his views quite a bit after his son was killed on the Western Front.
I have always been suspicious of his military fanboyism prior to that - blow out yet brains and go to yer gawd like a sojer and so on - revelling in it a bit too much
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
@Leon that’s true in general, but an appreciable minority of Mills and Boons’ readers are men, and there are women in my Military History Club who are formidably learned.
Leicester East is a crazy seat, but I really wouldn't bet on Labour at current odds.
The Labour East constituency party is faction ridden, and the suppression of the attempted putsch by Labour councillors against Mayor Soulsby last year has left a lot of ill feeling and created the One Leicester Party. I don't think Webbe has any real support as she has been a useless and absent MP. It is also one of the country's most Hindu seats, and one of the few where Sunak is popular.
The politics is internecine and opaque, but I reckon on a 3 way battle between Lab, Con and Vaz. Stop laughing at the back but Vaz is very popular there and ran a patronage programme that owes him lots of favours.
I reckon a narrow Lab win but either Con or Vaz could win. I got on Vaz at 41, but the current 29 is still value.
What’s Vaz actually campaigning on locally? Him as a local MP?
Mostly, and a bit on Gaza and Yemen, mixed with local boosterism and criticism of the mayor.
His campaign video has 61 000 views, quite a lot for an independent.
Maybe the delusional Reform manifesto might make a few think is this party really all that serious. The Tories seem to be avoiding going after Reform apart from saying they’re Labour enablers .
Surely the gloves should come off now .
It's Trussonomics on steroids from what I have read (which, admittedly, is a limited amount)
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 27 points in our latest poll. Con 19% (-2) Lab 46% (-) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Reform 16% (+4) SNP 2% (-2) Green 5% (-) Other 1% (-1) Fieldwork: 14th - 17th June 2024 Sample: 1,383 GB adults (Changes from 6th - 8th June 2024)
I'm just so glad Rishi called an early election to wrongfoot Reform.
The best call since the Earl of Cardigan at Sevastapol*.
*or whomever is best placed to be blamed.
I can only conclude that Labour are absolutely fucking brilliant at placing plants ready to play the long game.
I've heard three theories from reliable sources on why Rishi went for July, I'll only discuss two of them.
1) He has had enough of the criticism and realised if he went in July or November the result would be largely the same
2) He was worried about an Oct/Nov election getting entangled with the US election. We all know some Tories will back Trump, which is a vote loser, then you've got Trump commentating on the election which could be messy.
I not only predicted 4th July, so it couldn’t come as a complete shock to PBers, but I told you all the reasoning as to why in the weeks and months before they even started reasoning it for themselves.
Waiting for interest rate cut had run out of road, this meant mortgage and re-mortgage pain all up to autumn election. July and summer would bring not only surge to a record of Channel crossings, but none of the long promised covid flights as it got bogged down in courts. A Covid report, to put the “after that how can we trust you ever again?” on voters lips in time for autumn campaign. Autumn also brings higher energy prices and food prices, and inflation creeping back up. It could also mean a party conference, and a fiscal event for which there was no money left for rabbits from the pre election hat, at least not in these days of the OBR, the so called headroom Hunt had invented, he had already maxxed out.
They are not bright this Tory top team - Sunak’s switch to now fighting on individual freedom and aspiration for working families in his hustings speeches this week, wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t told him to do that on PB. Tory’s are making this campaign up as they go along, from reading PB and cribbing from my posts in particular.
You also predicted May.
Now people like me tipped July at 20s.
Can you boast of such a tip?
You put money on July at 20's?
Your name will go on ze list!
I am already on many lists.
I know when a revolution comes, be it a far right one or a hard left one, I will be one of the first people lined up against a wall.
Leicester East is a crazy seat, but I really wouldn't bet on Labour at current odds.
The Labour East constituency party is faction ridden, and the suppression of the attempted putsch by Labour councillors against Mayor Soulsby last year has left a lot of ill feeling and created the One Leicester Party. I don't think Webbe has any real support as she has been a useless and absent MP. It is also one of the country's most Hindu seats, and one of the few where Sunak is popular.
The politics is internecine and opaque, but I reckon on a 3 way battle between Lab, Con and Vaz. Stop laughing at the back but Vaz is very popular there and ran a patronage programme that owes him lots of favours.
I reckon a narrow Lab win but either Con or Vaz could win. I got on Vaz at 41, but the current 29 is still value.
What’s Vaz actually campaigning on locally? Him as a local MP?
Mostly, and a bit on Gaza and Yemen, mixed with local boosterism and criticism of the mayor.
His campaign video has 61 000 views, quite a lot for an independent.
EXCLUSIVE: Gossip is flying round senior Tory circles that David Cameron is planning to return to the Commons in an early by-election in autumn or spring. And then he will become the "One Nation" group's next leadership contender ⬇️
Richmond if Sunak holds looks the obvious one to me.
Certainly meets the definition of "winnable" and indeed they won the first by-election after the 1997 landslide reasonably comfortably (Michael Sheresby, the MP for Uxbridge died just a couple of days after his narrow re-election).
Not a foregone conclusion, though. No doubt both RefUK and one or other of LD and Labour would be keen to go for the jugular.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 27 points in our latest poll. Con 19% (-2) Lab 46% (-) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Reform 16% (+4) SNP 2% (-2) Green 5% (-) Other 1% (-1) Fieldwork: 14th - 17th June 2024 Sample: 1,383 GB adults (Changes from 6th - 8th June 2024)
I'm just so glad Rishi called an early election to wrongfoot Reform.
The best call since the Earl of Cardigan at Sevastapol*.
*or whomever is best placed to be blamed.
I can only conclude that Labour are absolutely fucking brilliant at placing plants ready to play the long game.
I've heard three theories from reliable sources on why Rishi went for July, I'll only discuss two of them.
1) He has had enough of the criticism and realised if he went in July or November the result would be largely the same
2) He was worried about an Oct/Nov election getting entangled with the US election. We all know some Tories will back Trump, which is a vote loser, then you've got Trump commentating on the election which could be messy.
I not only predicted 4th July, so it couldn’t come as a complete shock to PBers, but I told you all the reasoning as to why in the weeks and months before they even started reasoning it for themselves.
Waiting for interest rate cut had run out of road, this meant mortgage and re-mortgage pain all up to autumn election. July and summer would bring not only surge to a record of Channel crossings, but none of the long promised covid flights as it got bogged down in courts. A Covid report, to put the “after that how can we trust you ever again?” on voters lips in time for autumn campaign. Autumn also brings higher energy prices and food prices, and inflation creeping back up. It could also mean a party conference, and a fiscal event for which there was no money left for rabbits from the pre election hat, at least not in these days of the OBR, the so called headroom Hunt had invented, he had already maxxed out.
They are not bright this Tory top team - Sunak’s switch to now fighting on individual freedom and aspiration for working families in his hustings speeches this week, wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t told him to do that on PB. Tory’s are making this campaign up as they go along, from reading PB and cribbing from my posts in particular.
Konigsdammerung will turn out to be the correct theory
No. Through my encouraging the Tory campaign to adopt fight for individual freedom and aspiration half way through this campaign, I single handedly saved the Conservative Party from extinction.
Maybe the delusional Reform manifesto might make a few think is this party really all that serious. The Tories seem to be avoiding going after Reform apart from saying they’re Labour enablers .
Surely the gloves should come off now .
It's Trussonomics on steroids from what I have read (which, admittedly, is a limited amount)
I have only read @kle4's excellent summary for which I thank him.
At least Reform have identified some significant pockets of money to fund their changes, courtesy of the Bank of England, rather than saying it will all come from 'efficiency savings' and 'clamping down on benefit fraudsters'.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
Need a 3d grid:
Fiscal hawks/Managed decliners Social liberal/conservative Realist/Fantasist
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
A bit sweeping but, former group: Conventionally posh. The "clique" who have basically owned the country for centuries to one degree or another
Patel, Bravaman etc. are outside the clique. As is Rees Mogg (recusant Catholic stock).
A bit like the Ulster Unionist/Democratic Unionist split which is really a Church of Ireland (Establishment) versus Presbytarian (non establishment Split.
Just got off the phone to my parents, who are splitting voting for the first time I can recall: Mum going for Reform and Dad staying Conservative.
I wonder if the polls are fairly real. Reform still probably overcooked, but more real than not.
Could you forsee anything that would push your Mum back to the Tories by polling day, or anything that might push your father into joining her in Reform?
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
I think that’s a good question.
I think there’s a continuum, and that post-Thatcher there haven’t been many one nation Tories. Perhaps Hesseltine? Mostly, to my eyes, the split seems to be between the Redwoods of this world, who have a vision of a theoretical free market utopia but have no pragmatism in them; and the Gauke/Hammond type who are sort of managerial, but are very corporatist, and dislike the idea of the welfare state.
There is also a split on how socially liberal they are.
The likes of Cameron mostly just want power, but are vaguely socially liberal and like business because they have good champagne.
I think it’s all made worse by few of them having real life experience beyond politics.
Few of them meet my definition of a “proper Tory”, in the way many Tory voters do. They believe in politeness, pragmatism, no change do the sake of change, and fairness. They will always be polite and they don’t think the left is evil. They are the first to donate to charity and have no desire to see the unemployed suffer. They support libraries and healthcare, and indeed one of the things they now wish to conserve is the NHS. They do want to string up criminals though, and would like a massive navy, even if they have no great interest in foreign entaglements.
Maybe the delusional Reform manifesto might make a few think is this party really all that serious. The Tories seem to be avoiding going after Reform apart from saying they’re Labour enablers .
Surely the gloves should come off now .
It's Trussonomics on steroids from what I have read (which, admittedly, is a limited amount)
I have only read @kle4's excellent summary for which I thank him.
At least Reform have identified some significant pockets of money to fund their changes, courtesy of the Bank of England, rather than saying it will all come from 'efficiency savings' and 'clamping down on benefit fraudsters'.
Wasn't Trusses intention to do the same thing the reason that the financial establishment dropped her in it (not least by the barking BoE failure to raise rates when the US did, the day before her budget?).
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 27 points in our latest poll. Con 19% (-2) Lab 46% (-) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Reform 16% (+4) SNP 2% (-2) Green 5% (-) Other 1% (-1) Fieldwork: 14th - 17th June 2024 Sample: 1,383 GB adults (Changes from 6th - 8th June 2024)
I'm just so glad Rishi called an early election to wrongfoot Reform.
The best call since the Earl of Cardigan at Sevastapol*.
*or whomever is best placed to be blamed.
I can only conclude that Labour are absolutely fucking brilliant at placing plants ready to play the long game.
I've heard three theories from reliable sources on why Rishi went for July, I'll only discuss two of them.
1) He has had enough of the criticism and realised if he went in July or November the result would be largely the same
2) He was worried about an Oct/Nov election getting entangled with the US election. We all know some Tories will back Trump, which is a vote loser, then you've got Trump commentating on the election which could be messy.
I not only predicted 4th July, so it couldn’t come as a complete shock to PBers, but I told you all the reasoning as to why in the weeks and months before they even started reasoning it for themselves.
Waiting for interest rate cut had run out of road, this meant mortgage and re-mortgage pain all up to autumn election. July and summer would bring not only surge to a record of Channel crossings, but none of the long promised covid flights as it got bogged down in courts. A Covid report, to put the “after that how can we trust you ever again?” on voters lips in time for autumn campaign. Autumn also brings higher energy prices and food prices, and inflation creeping back up. It could also mean a party conference, and a fiscal event for which there was no money left for rabbits from the pre election hat, at least not in these days of the OBR, the so called headroom Hunt had invented, he had already maxxed out.
They are not bright this Tory top team - Sunak’s switch to now fighting on individual freedom and aspiration for working families in his hustings speeches this week, wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t told him to do that on PB. Tory’s are making this campaign up as they go along, from reading PB and cribbing from my posts in particular.
Konigsdammerung will turn out to be the correct theory
No. Through my encouraging the Tory campaign to adopt fight for individual freedom and aspiration half way through this campaign, I single handedly saved the Conservative Party from extinction.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
A bit sweeping but, former group: Conventionally posh. The "clique" who have basically owned the country for centuries to one degree or another
Patel, Bravaman etc. are outside the clique. As is Rees Mogg (recusant Catholic stock).
A bit like the Ulster Unionist/Democratic Unionist split which is really a Church of Ireland (Establishment) versus Presbytarian (non establishment Split.
Ummmm...I'm thinking you don't know much about the Ulster Unionists. Or indeed the DUP. They're almost all Presbyterian. It's just the DUP are affiliated to a more radical breakaway group.
Freeze ‘non-essential’ immigration to boost wages, protect public services, end housing crisis, cut crime.
What a load of crap.
You could cut net migration to zero today and the housing crisis will remain every bit as acute as everyone in here already will still need a house.
The only way to end the housing crisis is to construct massively more housing.
Migration adds to the amount of new housing needed, but new housing is needed either way.
That's numerically false. If you have zero net migration and a below replacement fertility rate, the amount of available housing per person would go up even without any building.
That assumes constant household size.
I think I'm right in saying that older people disproportionately 'over-occupy' housing so the effect of natural churn would counteract any tendency for younger people to have smaller households.
To give a concrete example, an elderly couple occupying a four-bedroom house could be bought by a younger couple starting a family, which could free up two single-person dwellings.
Only if the elderly couple move on somewhere else.
But people are living longer. We have 4 million extra elderly alive today than we did a decade ago and its only trending one way for a while now, and they all need homes, where the heck do you think they're going to live?
Or more realistically since they're continuing to live where they already live (and why shouldn't they) where is that younger couple starting a family going to live instead?
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
Interestingly I would have put Rees Mogg in a different category to Patel and Braverman. He has many faults and many ways he can justifiably be mocked but he is not an authoritarian fuckwit trying to make the SPG* look like models of liberal tolerance.
*genuinely not sure if everyone will get this reference. Special Patrol Group (SPG) were a 1980s police unit renowned for back of the van beatings of minorities mostly because they could and it was fun.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
You've got me wondering now... Who was the last Proper Conservative Wet to rise to prominence? My first guess is Chris Pattern, but he lost his Commons seat over thirty years ago.
Part of the distinction is Thatcherite realists (someone like Ken Clarke) and Thatcherite idealists (see a lot of the younger generation... Their ideas of Maggie is simplified, to put it charitably.)
See also Dave. In many ways, the most Eurosceptic Conservative leader so far in 2005... Just nowhere near Eurosceptic enough for his party.
Leicester East is a crazy seat, but I really wouldn't bet on Labour at current odds.
The Labour East constituency party is faction ridden, and the suppression of the attempted putsch by Labour councillors against Mayor Soulsby last year has left a lot of ill feeling and created the One Leicester Party. I don't think Webbe has any real support as she has been a useless and absent MP. It is also one of the country's most Hindu seats, and one of the few where Sunak is popular.
The politics is internecine and opaque, but I reckon on a 3 way battle between Lab, Con and Vaz. Stop laughing at the back but Vaz is very popular there and ran a patronage programme that owes him lots of favours.
I reckon a narrow Lab win but either Con or Vaz could win. I got on Vaz at 41, but the current 29 is still value.
What’s Vaz actually campaigning on locally? Him as a local MP?
Foxy is right on the money here - but I suspect a big lead among non-Hindu voters will get Lab home. Not all Hindus are Cons and I can say from anecdotal experience that not all Hindu Cons have time for Mr Sunak. There will be a Reform vote there.ii
Maybe the delusional Reform manifesto might make a few think is this party really all that serious. The Tories seem to be avoiding going after Reform apart from saying they’re Labour enablers .
Surely the gloves should come off now .
It's Trussonomics on steroids from what I have read (which, admittedly, is a limited amount)
I have only read @kle4's excellent summary for which I thank him.
At least Reform have identified some significant pockets of money to fund their changes, courtesy of the Bank of England, rather than saying it will all come from 'efficiency savings' and 'clamping down on benefit fraudsters'.
Wasn't Trusses intention to do the same thing the reason that the financial establishment dropped her in it (not least by the barking BoE failure to raise rates when the US did, the day before her budget?).
Not to my knowledge. She has never challenged the extent to which the BOE is currently bleeding HMG, either during her Prime Ministership or since - not directly anyway. She has correctly identified them as a major cause of her Government's downfall though.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
Interestingly I would have put Rees Mogg in a different category to Patel and Braverman. He has many faults and many ways he can justifiably be mocked by he is not an authoritarian fuckwit trying to make the SPG* look like models of liberal tolerance.
*genuinely not sure if everyone will get this reference. Special Patrol Group (SPG) were a 1980s police unit renowned for back of the van beatings of minorities mostly because they could and it was fun.
Anyway, it looks like today's polling is done, and it's excellent news for Labour. I had real concerns at the end of last week that Reform would start eating seriously into the (working class) Labour vote, but it's looking like more of a nibble, maybe even a few crumbs, rather than a meal.
I don't imagine today's Reform 'contract' will attract many, if any, more: any movement was down to Farage. A good majority for Labour looks pretty nailed on. The fight for second place looks interesting, but I suspect it will end up being a comfortable win for the Tories.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
I think that’s a good question.
I think there’s a continuum, and that post-Thatcher there haven’t been many one nation Tories. Perhaps Hesseltine? Mostly, to my eyes, the split seems to be between the Redwoods of this world, who have a vision of a theoretical free market utopia but have no pragmatism in them; and the Gauke/Hammond type who are sort of managerial, but are very corporatist, and dislike the idea of the welfare state.
There is also a split on how socially liberal they are.
The likes of Cameron mostly just want power, but are vaguely socially liberal and like business because they have good champagne.
I think it’s all made worse by few of them having real life experience beyond politics.
Few of them meet my definition of a “proper Tory”, in the way many Tory voters do. They believe in politeness, pragmatism, no change do the sake of change, and fairness. They will always be polite and they don’t think the left is evil. They are the first to donate to charity and have no desire to see the unemployed suffer. They support libraries and healthcare, and indeed one of the things they now wish to conserve is the NHS. They do want to string up criminals though, and would like a massive navy, even if they have no great interest in foreign entaglements.
I think managerialist is accurate. Not paternalistic old school Tories. More German CDU.
The conservatives now have few of any of the old paternalists. They have the Cameroonian CDU; the Redwood free marketeers and ur-Brexiteers in the Milei mould; the authoritarians who have always been a fixture of the party, more akin to the Polish PiS; and a few MAGA types.
The Deltapoll Baxtered leaves the Tories under 20 seats, and, though there are one or two where I am sure sure who is standing, it would leave not a single well known Tory name. Not even Tugendhat and Barclay who would survive most meteorites.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
A bit sweeping but, former group: Conventionally posh. The "clique" who have basically owned the country for centuries to one degree or another
Patel, Bravaman etc. are outside the clique. As is Rees Mogg (recusant Catholic stock).
A bit like the Ulster Unionist/Democratic Unionist split which is really a Church of Ireland (Establishment) versus Presbytarian (non establishment Split.
I agree that it's an insult to the memory of Disraeli to call this particular breed 'One Nation' Conservatives.
@Leon that’s true in general, but an appreciable minority of Mills and Boons’ readers are men, and there are women in my Military History Club who are formidably learned.
It, like many things, @Leon says, is bullshit. It's inherited/learned behaviour, not intrinsic characteristics.
In the past, many people have said that women cold never do well in motorsport. Including some on here. But as I point out, the problem is not male versus female capabilities, but the fact that so few women start off in the sport at the right time, and sponsorship and progression is so much harder for women. (Because sponsors want people who progress, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy).
As it happens, Jamie Chadwick (*) has just got her first pole position in Indy NXT (**), and won her first race. The first woman to get a pole or win. A few races earlier, she was the third woman to get a podium.
The problem is not capability; the problem is that so few get into the sport in the first place: because it is seen as a 'male' sport; and few girls start off at a young age. And when they did, barriers were often placed in their way. Chadwick has done well, in part, because her family are fairly well-off and could afford to fund her racing without much sponsorship.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
I think that’s a good question.
I think there’s a continuum, and that post-Thatcher there haven’t been many one nation Tories. Perhaps Hesseltine? Mostly, to my eyes, the split seems to be between the Redwoods of this world, who have a vision of a theoretical free market utopia but have no pragmatism in them; and the Gauke/Hammond type who are sort of managerial, but are very corporatist, and dislike the idea of the welfare state.
There is also a split on how socially liberal they are.
The likes of Cameron mostly just want power, but are vaguely socially liberal and like business because they have good champagne.
I think it’s all made worse by few of them having real life experience beyond politics.
Few of them meet my definition of a “proper Tory”, in the way many Tory voters do. They believe in politeness, pragmatism, no change do the sake of change, and fairness. They will always be polite and they don’t think the left is evil. They are the first to donate to charity and have no desire to see the unemployed suffer. They support libraries and healthcare, and indeed one of the things they now wish to conserve is the NHS. They do want to string up criminals though, and would like a massive navy, even if they have no great interest in foreign entaglements.
I think managerialist is accurate. Not paternalistic old school Tories. More German CDU.
The conservatives now have few of any of the old paternalists. They have the Cameroonian CDU; the Redwood free marketeers and ur-Brexiteers in the Milei mould; the authoritarians who have always been a fixture of the party, more akin to the Polish PiS; and a few MAGA types.
Indeed. The death of the paternalist maybe says something about the change in British society and the end of our class system. It’s the one disadvantage I can think of from it - too few people are now told “you’re bloody lucky and have everything, use it to help others”.
🚨New Voting Intention🚨 Labour lead by 27 points in our latest poll. Con 19% (-2) Lab 46% (-) Lib Dem 10% (+1) Reform 16% (+4) SNP 2% (-2) Green 5% (-) Other 1% (-1) Fieldwork: 14th - 17th June 2024 Sample: 1,383 GB adults (Changes from 6th - 8th June 2024)
I'm just so glad Rishi called an early election to wrongfoot Reform.
The best call since the Earl of Cardigan at Sevastapol*.
*or whomever is best placed to be blamed.
I can only conclude that Labour are absolutely fucking brilliant at placing plants ready to play the long game.
I've heard three theories from reliable sources on why Rishi went for July, I'll only discuss two of them.
1) He has had enough of the criticism and realised if he went in July or November the result would be largely the same
2) He was worried about an Oct/Nov election getting entangled with the US election. We all know some Tories will back Trump, which is a vote loser, then you've got Trump commentating on the election which could be messy.
I not only predicted 4th July, so it couldn’t come as a complete shock to PBers, but I told you all the reasoning as to why in the weeks and months before they even started reasoning it for themselves.
Waiting for interest rate cut had run out of road, this meant mortgage and re-mortgage pain all up to autumn election. July and summer would bring not only surge to a record of Channel crossings, but none of the long promised covid flights as it got bogged down in courts. A Covid report, to put the “after that how can we trust you ever again?” on voters lips in time for autumn campaign. Autumn also brings higher energy prices and food prices, and inflation creeping back up. It could also mean a party conference, and a fiscal event for which there was no money left for rabbits from the pre election hat, at least not in these days of the OBR, the so called headroom Hunt had invented, he had already maxxed out.
They are not bright this Tory top team - Sunak’s switch to now fighting on individual freedom and aspiration for working families in his hustings speeches this week, wouldn’t have happened if I hadn’t told him to do that on PB. Tory’s are making this campaign up as they go along, from reading PB and cribbing from my posts in particular.
You also predicted May.
Now people like me tipped July at 20s.
Can you boast of such a tip?
You were no doubt influenced by the text of the suggested PB thread that I emailed to you in May 2023. Possibly a bit too technical, but the conclusion was spot on. Can I have my cut please?
"ENERGY PRICES POINT TO AN EARLY GENERAL ELECTION One of Rishi Sunak’s five pledges is to halve inflation this year. It was an easy pledge to make. The CPI was always going to fall rapidly so long as energy costs did not rise even further above their extraordinarily high levels of the past winter. We can predict energy price inflation some way in advance, based on what happened to prices 12 months ago. As energy has a major impact on the CPI, that gives us a good idea of what will happen to the CPI generally. The fall in the April CPI to 8.7% (10.1% in March) was entirely down to measuring the current energy price guarantee price of £2,500 relative to the £1,971 price cap of April 2022 instead of the much lower March 2022 figure of £1,277. The only surprise was that the fall was not even larger, inflation in other sectors being unexpectedly high. We now know that the energy price cap is to fall back to £2,074 for at least 3 months from July 2023, with analysts predicting a longer period of stability. If so, from the October 2023 CPI, energy prices will then be 17% down from a year earlier, compared to the year-on-year increase of 27% still contributing to the April 2022 CPI. So when planning the timing of the general election, Sunak knows that energy price base effects will push down headline CPI rates the most from October 2023 onwards. But that significant and beneficial base effect can be expected to end with the June 2024 CPI. Energy price base effects will once again be pushing up inflation from the July 2024 CPI onwards. The July 2024 CPI will be published in late August 2024. That’s a strong reason for Sunak to hold the general election before then. Wulfrun Phil"
Ha! I'm very much in favour of that, and have mentioned it in the past. Although I do think "... or neighbouring constituency" is required to cope with boundary changes, especially in an area like London where the constituencies can e tiny in area terms.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
Interestingly I would have put Rees Mogg in a different category to Patel and Braverman. He has many faults and many ways he can justifiably be mocked by he is not an authoritarian fuckwit trying to make the SPG* look like models of liberal tolerance.
*genuinely not sure if everyone will get this reference. Special Patrol Group (SPG) were a 1980s police unit renowned for back of the van beatings of minorities mostly because they could and it was fun.
Ha! I'm very much in favour of that, and have mentioned it in the past. Although I do think "... or neighbouring constituency" is required to cope with boundary changes, especially in an area like London where the constituencies can e tiny in area terms.
The Deltapoll Baxtered leaves the Tories under 20 seats, and, though there are one or two where I am sure sure who is standing, it would leave not a single well known Tory name. Not even Tugendhat and Barclay who would survive most meteorites.
Maybe the delusional Reform manifesto might make a few think is this party really all that serious. The Tories seem to be avoiding going after Reform apart from saying they’re Labour enablers .
Surely the gloves should come off now .
Today's Truss/Kwarteng "manifesto" will not prove a reality check for Reform voters.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
Interestingly I would have put Rees Mogg in a different category to Patel and Braverman. He has many faults and many ways he can justifiably be mocked but he is not an authoritarian fuckwit trying to make the SPG* look like models of liberal tolerance.
*genuinely not sure if everyone will get this reference. Special Patrol Group (SPG) were a 1980s police unit renowned for back of the van beatings of minorities mostly because they could and it was fun.
I thought SPG was Vivian from the Young Ones' hamster.
The SPG weren't fussed on creed or colour. They were happy to beat the s*** out of all-comers as I almost found out near Gloucester Road tube station in 1983. Myself and my friends did have a head start but Usain Bolt couldn't have caught me when I clocked them piling out of their Transit.
This is the stat that should terrify Tories. The last poll that showed a VI rise for them compared to the previous comparable poll by that company (so no MRP vs normal etc) was More In Common on June 3rd, 40 polls ago. Just noise should have made that impossible. That's terminal unless it switches like now, their vote is disintegrating.
Thanks for working that out. It is indicative of a strong underlying trend that noise didn't create a single poll to show an increase in the Tory share.
The Deltapoll Baxtered leaves the Tories under 20 seats, and, though there are one or two where I am sure sure who is standing, it would leave not a single well known Tory name. Not even Tugendhat and Barclay who would survive most meteorites.
Would Gavin Williamson survive?
I could say something about cockroaches but it would be unkind to cockroaches.
Maybe the delusional Reform manifesto might make a few think is this party really all that serious. The Tories seem to be avoiding going after Reform apart from saying they’re Labour enablers .
Surely the gloves should come off now .
Today's Truss/Kwarteng "manifesto" will not prove a reality check for Reform voters.
An entirely unhelpful and counterproductive comment by Gauke that simply fires the starting pistol in an interfratricidal war.
The Party must be better than this.
It's investing a huge amount too much importance in the notice anyone takes of Gauke to imagine him firing the starting pistol on anything. He's a bitter old ex-Tory irritant, nothing more.
Not sure why you're so hostile to Gauke - you called him repulsive earlier. Obviously his politics are different from yours - he's an old-school one-nation Tory, but he's still a Tory. It's to their credit that Conservative Home give him a platform every month or so, although his articles attract comments much like yours. But he's a pretty harmless chap undeserving of such vitriol, as far as I can see.
See, what I take issue with is people calling Gauke (or Cameron/Osborne) “one nation”. When you look at what they they did to the benefits system, and the line they took on its recipients, I would describe them as pretty economically dry Tories. We’ve ended up recasting anyone who voted against Brexit as one nation. See also Ken Clarke - he’s a keep of the Thatcherite flame. I would describe a one nation Tory as more of a 1950s paternalist that’s extinct now. The people who were pushed out as “wet”. My kind of Tory.
It's a fair point - Gauke is fiscally very dry, and 'one-nation' isn't right. Philip Hammond is another one. But Gauke, Hammond, Cameron, Clarke etc. are clearly a very different type of Tory from Braverman, Rees-Mogg, Patel etc. So how would you categorise them?
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
Interestingly I would have put Rees Mogg in a different category to Patel and Braverman. He has many faults and many ways he can justifiably be mocked but he is not an authoritarian fuckwit trying to make the SPG* look like models of liberal tolerance.
*genuinely not sure if everyone will get this reference. Special Patrol Group (SPG) were a 1980s police unit renowned for back of the van beatings of minorities mostly because they could and it was fun.
I thought SPG was Vivian from the Young Ones' hamster.
The SPG weren't fussed on creed or colour. They were happy to beat the s*** out of all-comers as I almost found out near Gloucester Road tube station in 1983. Myself and my friends did have a head start but Usain Bolt couldn't have caught me when I clocked them piling out of their Transit.
For a bit of explanation - police officers with too many complaints from the public got transferred to the SPG. It was used as a sin bin for…. Problems.
Musings. I expect the Tories to poll much better than predicted. They usually do. However. There is no discernable sign of this. They've been heading inexorably down since the Election was called. I'm struggling to believe any of the seat numbers. Frankly, under 150 seems inconceivable. And yet I am left to reflect that under 200 seemed similar a few weeks ago. I believe my competition prediction was Labour majority of 70. More significantly, perhaps, there were a handful of people on NOM when the election was called, and a couple for Tory largest Party or even majority. Are there any now?
@Mexicanpete was on here every night telling anyone who would listen that Rishi was going to take the Tories to a 1992-style Tory majority. I presume he is on the 140-1 in a big way and planning his luxury world cruise.
He kept up the charade for much longer than I expected.
More surprising, some folks took his posts seriously
Oh he was serious alright, at least at one point. Don’t let him fool you.
I don't deny I feared for 1992. I am still not entirely convinced the voter won't give us a shock to some degree on July 4th. I suspect with Reform being caressed by the media, the Conservatives might not be the net beneficiaries of any late surge, but I don't know. You are probably too young to remember Labour's victory rally in Sheffield.
In his early months as PM, Rishi oozed confidence and made Starmer look very lacklustre at PMQs.
It all unravelled a little for the Prime Minister after he sought the advice of children at CCHQ and cancelled HS2 and jumped aboard the fiasco that was Boris Johnson's Rwandan stunt. Could he turn it around by a fortnight Thursday? Unlikely, but remember 1992.
Comments
Women and horses, power and war.
Kipling R.
The last poll that showed a VI rise for them compared to the previous comparable poll by that company (so no MRP vs normal etc) was More In Common on June 3rd, 40 polls ago. Just noise should have made that impossible.
That's terminal unless it switches like now, their vote is disintegrating.
His campaign video has 61 000 views, quite a lot for an independent.
https://youtu.be/KdkpspNaAi0?feature=shared
Pro-Brexit = an awful knave
CON 27
LAB 546
LDM 49
PC 4
RFM 3
OTH 2
GRN 1
NI 18
SNP 0
Exceptionally silly. But the Panda memes create themselves.
Similarly, if I were to query seat projections (and I have learnt not to on this site) then it would be over Reform totals once they go over a given percentage and the modelling is trying to cope with something genuinely new.
Does it not seem odd to smash your councillor base, depress your party and boost all your opponents to look like winners by proving that you really are that far behind… and then call the early election, or Snappy Lec as history books will call it.
You and 90% of PB were still insisting it’s Autumn when I first posted July 4th.
As to who called what first, how you replied when I first said July 4th, who came up with Dutch Salute first, called the end of Thangham first, the truth is always there on PB with a simple search. For ever and ever.
Amen.
Surely the gloves should come off now .
And go easy on me - remember, I'm a leftie, so I may struggle with Tory groupings but I could give you chapter and verse on the various Trotskyite and other groupings in my world.
Not a foregone conclusion, though. No doubt both RefUK and one or other of LD and Labour would be keen to go for the jugular.
https://x.com/tomchivers/status/1802750989226631476
This one is even better. The candidate forgot to add their name:
https://x.com/lkirbyradstock/status/1802640910418628764
At least Reform have identified some significant pockets of money to fund their changes, courtesy of the Bank of England, rather than saying it will all come from 'efficiency savings' and 'clamping down on benefit fraudsters'.
Fiscal hawks/Managed decliners
Social liberal/conservative
Realist/Fantasist
https://x.com/spudgfsh/status/1799572893828780540
Patel, Bravaman etc. are outside the clique. As is Rees Mogg (recusant Catholic stock).
A bit like the Ulster Unionist/Democratic Unionist split which is really a Church of Ireland (Establishment) versus Presbytarian (non establishment Split.
Starting with the Raveneau Foret 2014
I think there’s a continuum, and that post-Thatcher there haven’t been many one nation Tories. Perhaps Hesseltine? Mostly, to my eyes, the split seems to be between the Redwoods of this world, who have a vision of a theoretical free market utopia but have no pragmatism in them; and the Gauke/Hammond type who are sort of managerial, but are very corporatist, and dislike the idea of the welfare state.
There is also a split on how socially liberal they are.
The likes of Cameron mostly just want power, but are vaguely socially liberal and like business because they have good champagne.
I think it’s all made worse by few of them having real life experience beyond politics.
Few of them meet my definition of a “proper Tory”, in the way many Tory voters do. They believe in politeness, pragmatism, no change do the sake of change, and fairness. They will always be polite and they don’t think the left is evil. They are the first to donate to charity and have no desire to see the unemployed suffer. They support libraries and healthcare, and indeed one of the things they now wish to conserve is the NHS. They do want to string up criminals though, and would like a massive navy, even if they have no great interest in foreign entaglements.
Lol.
Does Nigel know?
But people are living longer. We have 4 million extra elderly alive today than we did a decade ago and its only trending one way for a while now, and they all need homes, where the heck do you think they're going to live?
Or more realistically since they're continuing to live where they already live (and why shouldn't they) where is that younger couple starting a family going to live instead?
*genuinely not sure if everyone will get this reference. Special Patrol Group (SPG) were a 1980s police unit renowned for back of the van beatings of minorities mostly because they could and it was fun.
Part of the distinction is Thatcherite realists (someone like Ken Clarke) and Thatcherite idealists (see a lot of the younger generation... Their ideas of Maggie is simplified, to put it charitably.)
See also Dave. In many ways, the most Eurosceptic Conservative leader so far in 2005... Just nowhere near Eurosceptic enough for his party.
I don't imagine today's Reform 'contract' will attract many, if any, more: any movement was down to Farage. A good majority for Labour looks pretty nailed on.
The fight for second place looks interesting, but I suspect it will end up being a comfortable win for the Tories.
The conservatives now have few of any of the old paternalists. They have the Cameroonian CDU; the Redwood free marketeers and ur-Brexiteers in the Milei mould; the authoritarians who have always been a fixture of the party, more akin to the Polish PiS; and a few MAGA types.
NEW THREAD
"MPS to live in the area they wish to serve for 4 years before election, to improve local representation."
This kind of frivolous attitude really doesn't help politics in this country.
https://www.countbinface.com/manifesto
In the past, many people have said that women cold never do well in motorsport. Including some on here. But as I point out, the problem is not male versus female capabilities, but the fact that so few women start off in the sport at the right time, and sponsorship and progression is so much harder for women. (Because sponsors want people who progress, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy).
As it happens, Jamie Chadwick (*) has just got her first pole position in Indy NXT (**), and won her first race. The first woman to get a pole or win. A few races earlier, she was the third woman to get a podium.
The problem is not capability; the problem is that so few get into the sport in the first place: because it is seen as a 'male' sport; and few girls start off at a young age. And when they did, barriers were often placed in their way. Chadwick has done well, in part, because her family are fairly well-off and could afford to fund her racing without much sponsorship.
https://www.planetf1.com/features/milestone-jamie-chadwick-indy-nxt-win
(*) Who I have mentioned on here before...
(**) The feeder series for full Indycars.
"ENERGY PRICES POINT TO AN EARLY GENERAL ELECTION
One of Rishi Sunak’s five pledges is to halve inflation this year. It was an easy pledge to make. The CPI was always going to fall rapidly so long as energy costs did not rise even further above their extraordinarily high levels of the past winter.
We can predict energy price inflation some way in advance, based on what happened to prices 12 months ago. As energy has a major impact on the CPI, that gives us a good idea of what will happen to the CPI generally. The fall in the April CPI to 8.7% (10.1% in March) was entirely down to measuring the current energy price guarantee price of £2,500 relative to the £1,971 price cap of April 2022 instead of the much lower March 2022 figure of £1,277. The only surprise was that the fall was not even larger, inflation in other sectors being unexpectedly high.
We now know that the energy price cap is to fall back to £2,074 for at least 3 months from July 2023, with analysts predicting a longer period of stability. If so, from the October 2023 CPI, energy prices will then be 17% down from a year earlier, compared to the year-on-year increase of 27% still contributing to the April 2022 CPI.
So when planning the timing of the general election, Sunak knows that energy price base effects will push down headline CPI rates the most from October 2023 onwards. But that significant and beneficial base effect can be expected to end with the June 2024 CPI. Energy price base effects will once again be pushing up inflation from the July 2024 CPI onwards.
The July 2024 CPI will be published in late August 2024. That’s a strong reason for Sunak to hold the general election before then.
Wulfrun Phil"
Lol
The SPG weren't fussed on creed or colour. They were happy to beat the s*** out of all-comers as I almost found out near Gloucester Road tube station in 1983. Myself and my friends did have a head start but Usain Bolt couldn't have caught me when I clocked them piling out of their Transit.
In his early months as PM, Rishi oozed confidence and made Starmer look very lacklustre at PMQs.
It all unravelled a little for the Prime Minister after he sought the advice of children at CCHQ and cancelled HS2 and jumped aboard the fiasco that was Boris Johnson's Rwandan stunt. Could he turn it around by a fortnight Thursday? Unlikely, but remember 1992.