Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

The Battle of Tewkesbury – politicalbetting.com

12467

Comments

  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,018
    On the topic of safe(ish) Tory seats, can I present South West Wiltshire? Current incumbent Andrew Murrison (a decent enough chap). Labour is the closest challenger but for some reason have selected a Londoner who doesn't live anywhere near Wiltshire to be their candidate. And she is also a person of colour.

    I'm not implying that the constituency is full of white power racists, far from it, but it certainly is a much less diverse part of the country than almost anywhere else.

    Betfair odds: Murrison (Tory) 1.88, Akoto (Labour) 1.8 - so slight favourite.

    DYOR but I think Murrison will be ok. (Perhaps @kle4 might have an opinion as its his constituency too?)
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,299
    https://x.com/steven_swinford/status/1803718591310610717

    Cabinet ministers say that huge polls showing Tories are on course for wipeout are beyond their ‘wildest nightmares’

    ‘The country has made a fundamental decision overall. Anything that is said about tax or anything else is ignored.

    ‘There is no way of sorting this. You don’t give up locally. But there is no quick fix to this. I hope I can stick to the Nytol and not reach for the Valium’
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,613

    Tory director of campaigning being looked into over election bet

    The BBC can reveal that the Conservative Party’s Director of Campaigning Tony Lee is also being looked into by the Gambling Commission over an alleged bet relating to the timing of the general election.

    The BBC reported earlier this morning that Mr Lee – who, we understand, took a leave of absence from his job yesterday afternoon – is married to the Conservative candidate who is also being looked into by the betting industry regulator. Laura Saunders, the party’s candidate in Bristol North West has worked for the Tories since 2015.

    She is married to Lee. It is not known when the bet she placed was made or for how much money. Nor is it known when Lee placed a bet and for how much money. Laura Saunders and Tony Lee has been approached for comment by the BBC and have not replied. A Conservative Party spokesman told the BBC: “We have been contacted by the Gambling Commission about a small number of individuals. As the Gambling Commission is an independent body, it wouldn’t be proper to comment further, until any process is concluded.”


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cd119p9een9t

    These are not the actions of a party that deserves to continue existing.
    They couldn't organise a pregnancy on a council estate.
    Reminds me of one of the most gloriously offensive TTOI lines, from Jamie I think - "You're about as secure as a hymen in a South London comprehensive"
  • Options
    Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,866
    kjh said:


    2nd bit of feedback from Wantage and Didcot ( @Andy_Cooke and @NickPalmer ). Again another member of the campaign I am involved in who are non political but very interested in who gets elected for obvious reasons. The current Tory MP has been a champion for our cause.


    "I have had campaign leaflets from Labour and the SDP, plus several leaflets from the Liberal Democrats.

    The Liberal Democrats are making quite in effort in Wantage, and seem to regard this as one of their target seats."

    Thanks, kjh - always useful to get the feel of whether or not we're cutting through.
  • Options
    SandraMcSandraMc Posts: 630
    Report from the South Coast:

    In the past fortnight we have driven into Chichester from three different routes. Along each route we saw dozens and dozens of Lib Dem posters. I think I might have spotted one Conservative one.

    Today in a very upmarket part of Emsworth I saw two Labour Party posters.

    The tide is turning...
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 16,705
    kjh said:

    The Lib Dems have flattered to deceive at every general election in my memory, but if they were to win Tewkesbury then this election would break that sequence.

    I think the Reform surge in the polling indicates a rootless electorate, willing to be persuaded to vote for any one of a range of parties, but not yet particularly convinced by any.

    I expect Labour to poll well north of 10% here, despite not trying, and for the Tory to be saved as a consequence.

    The incumbent Tory, Laurence Robertson, has a part-time job on the Betting and Gaming Council, so, one never knows, he might be a lurker here.

    They didn't flatter to deceive in 97 so I assume you are just a mere whippersnapper @LostPassword. As the winning results were coming in several of us seasoned campaigners were going 'Where the ..... is that?'
    1997 was the first election where I watched the results, in 1992 I only observed the glum reactions of the adults the day after. So I suppose it forms the baseline against which I judge all subsequent elections, as I didn't have any expectations for 1997 itself.
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,018
    Ghedebrav said:

    Astonishing news that the CCHQ director of campaigns has now taken a leave of absence while his wife - a Con candidate - is being investigated for placing a bet on the date of the election.

    It encapsulates both the incompetence and corruption at the heart of this sorry government (or indeed their contempt for democracy). This is the sort of thing that can cut through as well. They deserve the kicking that is hopefully coming to them.

    I may be in the minority, but is it not possible that those who had a tip about the election genuinely thought there was nothing wrong in using said tip for a wager? I know ignorance of the law (is this is legal thing, or terms and conditions with the betting firm?) is not a defence.

    There also seems to be a grey area. I placed bets on the day that things were leaking out, but before the official announcement. Was that illegal?
  • Options
    peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,914

    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    Great header.

    I am reminded that PtP and I had a conversation about whether Tewkesbury would be a LibDem target back in 2019:

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2159977#Comment_2159977

    Great header.

    I am reminded that PtP and I had a conversation about whether Tewkesbury would be a LibDem target back in 2019:

    https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/2159977#Comment_2159977

    It ticks the Lib Dem boxes:

    Cathedral (well OK, abbey): check
    Orchards, Vineyards or Cattle: check
    Rugby clubs: check
    Steep hills: sort of...in the distance
    Fuck off great big yellow diamond signboards: check
    Great checklist - pretty much explains the liberal anomaly of NE Fife. Liberalism survives in those parts of the country left broadly unchanged by the industrial revolution.
    The LDs were also second in Chelsea and Fulham in 2019 and Cities of London and Westminster and do well in spa towns, holding Bath and with Tunbridge Wells, Cheltenham and Harrogate and Knaresborough on their target list.

    Basically along with having a Waitrose and Gales, having a LD MP or the LDs second to the Tories at the last general election is a good indicator of poshness
    Yes, it's a peculiar thing that the LDs do well in Spa towns.

    Something in the water?
    Indeed, Barnes ... close to my neck, is probably the nearest the folk around here there could get to 'Baths'.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,410
    edited June 20
    Eabhal said:

    FWIW This betting scandal is cutting through in my drug addled cycling/climbing community.

    No one gives a shit but they basically think it's pathetic that a bunch of rich Tories were insider trading on the election date. The main issue is they know I place political bets and think I'm a mug for trying to outwit these people.

    They aren't wrong.

    It's not "insider trading" (It would be if it was placed with SPIN mind) and there'll always be those with insider information regarding bets. I'd be amazed if the CPS prosecute and even more amazed if there's any convictions (The PO may well be reassigned though). That said it is I agree a terrible look.
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,814
    edited June 20
    I want to hedge against the end of the United Kingdom (and life as we know it) but Farage is in at 28 already.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,776
    Scoop: The US is set to halt all open orders for Patriot air defence systems & interceptor missiles until Ukraine has enough to defend itself from Russia’s air attacks. 3 people with knowledge of the decision said the move would be announced today.
    https://ft.com/content/89fe9d6b-3a0f-42a5-af50-cff7f457a126
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 5,497
    You have to feel for some of the Tory candidates who must think every day there’s another self inflicted wound .

    This latest own goal just further trashes Sunaks speech when he came in as PM .

  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951
    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    We are fucked. The Superme Court was a terrible idea and the Judicial Appointments Commission means we have politicised judges whether we like it or not. And mostly leftwing judges: it's yet another hideous and deliberate legacy from New Labour, which the Tories failed to fix, and they had FOURTEEN YEARS to do it

    The Tories must die, Reform or Whoever must take over, and when we get our next chance we basically need a revolution, to sweep the entire blob into the North Sea, judges as well
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,814
    Pulpstar said:

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW This betting scandal is cutting through in my drug addled cycling/climbing community.

    No one gives a shit but they basically think it's pathetic that a bunch of rich Tories were insider trading on the election date. The main issue is they know I place political bets and think I'm a mug for trying to outwit these people.

    They aren't wrong.

    It's not "insider trading" (It would be if it was placed with SPIN mind) and there'll always be those with insider information regarding bets. I'd be amazed if the CPS prosecute and even more amazed if there's any convictions (The PO may well be reassigned though). That said it is I agree a terrible look.
    I'm afraid it is to 98% of the population. These folks can't tell the difference between an ISA and an ice cream.
  • Options
    boulayboulay Posts: 4,800
    How is it possible for major reform of CCHQ? They aren’t exactly likely to sack themselves for being blindingly incompetent for a long time.

    I don’t know how they are structured but is there a way a coup can happen and dump out the idiots who have been running things and appointing or selecting jokers who are haunting the party now?

    Everything from staffing to candidate selection (Mayor of London mess) seems to be a terrible joke and for all Rishi’s deficiencies it’s not helped by a dysfunctional political operation behind him or whoever takes over.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,062

    Ghedebrav said:

    Astonishing news that the CCHQ director of campaigns has now taken a leave of absence while his wife - a Con candidate - is being investigated for placing a bet on the date of the election.

    It encapsulates both the incompetence and corruption at the heart of this sorry government (or indeed their contempt for democracy). This is the sort of thing that can cut through as well. They deserve the kicking that is hopefully coming to them.

    I may be in the minority, but is it not possible that those who had a tip about the election genuinely thought there was nothing wrong in using said tip for a wager? I know ignorance of the law (is this is legal thing, or terms and conditions with the betting firm?) is not a defence.

    There also seems to be a grey area. I placed bets on the day that things were leaking out, but before the official announcement. Was that illegal?
    This is politics. Legally (betting law isn't my thing) it might not be a problem. To the untrained eye, including that of this lawyer, it is.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,413
    148grss said:

    OllyT said:

    Right now it is a very confused picture as to whether the Tories are ahead of Reform or vice versa.

    This comes at a point where millions of postal votes will be being cast by a section of the electorate that leans heavily towards elderly Tory/Reform voters. Most of these votes will have been cast before it becomes clear who is the stronger in many seats.

    The worst situation for the right is a relatively even split between Tory and Reform and that appears to be where we are right now. The right needs one or the other to become clearly dominant in the next week or so if it is going to derail a Labour super majority.

    My best case scenario is that the vote shares of both the Tories and Reform are just so inefficiently distributed across parliamentary seats that it fucks them both. Lets say both of them get between 15% - 20% nationally, under FPTP, we could actually see neither party winning any seats. Is that likely, of course not, but it would be hilarious.
    Except of course it would mean Leon winning his bet and we would literally never hear the end of it.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,180
    edited June 20
    DougSeal said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Astonishing news that the CCHQ director of campaigns has now taken a leave of absence while his wife - a Con candidate - is being investigated for placing a bet on the date of the election.

    It encapsulates both the incompetence and corruption at the heart of this sorry government (or indeed their contempt for democracy). This is the sort of thing that can cut through as well. They deserve the kicking that is hopefully coming to them.

    I may be in the minority, but is it not possible that those who had a tip about the election genuinely thought there was nothing wrong in using said tip for a wager? I know ignorance of the law (is this is legal thing, or terms and conditions with the betting firm?) is not a defence.

    There also seems to be a grey area. I placed bets on the day that things were leaking out, but before the official announcement. Was that illegal?
    This is politics. Legally (betting law isn't my thing) it might not be a problem. To the untrained eye, including that of this lawyer, it is.
    It's also probably not a great way to endear yourselves to the betting companies who, via the various MRPs being picked up by every barchart-toting leaflet from Aberdeenshire North & Moray East to St Ives, are having an outsize impact on this election.
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,814
    edited June 20
    DougSeal said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Astonishing news that the CCHQ director of campaigns has now taken a leave of absence while his wife - a Con candidate - is being investigated for placing a bet on the date of the election.

    It encapsulates both the incompetence and corruption at the heart of this sorry government (or indeed their contempt for democracy). This is the sort of thing that can cut through as well. They deserve the kicking that is hopefully coming to them.

    I may be in the minority, but is it not possible that those who had a tip about the election genuinely thought there was nothing wrong in using said tip for a wager? I know ignorance of the law (is this is legal thing, or terms and conditions with the betting firm?) is not a defence.

    There also seems to be a grey area. I placed bets on the day that things were leaking out, but before the official announcement. Was that illegal?
    This is politics. Legally (betting law isn't my thing) it might not be a problem. To the untrained eye, including that of this lawyer, it is.
    The BBC news push notification includes words like "investigation" and "commission". That's enough.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329
    edited June 20
    deleted, fuck engaging with that wanker
  • Options
    MJWMJW Posts: 1,549
    Pulpstar said:

    TimS said:

    Election theory of the day.

    Labour swingback.

    The swingback phenomenon is long standing and well documented. It seems particularly to benefit Conservatives, but we also saw some evidence of it when Labour were in power.

    The idea is that ahead of an election people flirt with change and sending a message to the government. They’re fed up. But when the actual election day looms they consider their options and opt for the devil they know. So you get swingback to the incumbent.

    This year lots of people are flirting with change. In fact the vast majority of the electorate, both in E&W and Scotland. But they are not just looking at Labour and the Lib Dems, the “established opposition parties”. They’re also looking at Reform and Green.

    Over the next two weeks will people start to focus their minds and end up voting more conservatively? Yes, I think they will. It usually happens. But will the beneficiaries in England and Wales be the Tories? Perhaps not exclusively. Starmer and Labour are so much part of the furniture, and what they offer is so non-alarming and dull, that I wonder if they could be the main beneficiaries. A safe option, while still representing change.

    Swingback, but to the main opposition party.

    Just a thought.

    Not a ridiculous idea, but on the whole I disagree.

    Labour are still an unknown quantity. The small c conservative reflex will be to stick with the incumbent government.

    And this is definitely a CHANGE election, but one where Labour aren't offering much in the way of change. That's why Reform are catching so much attention.

    Labour are stuck between two stools. I think their campaign is in real trouble. They really need to come out and rally an anti-Farage vote, but they also need to offer a positive and optimistic vision for people to vote for. But it's too late for Starmer to pull that out of the hat. He doesn't do improv, I don't think he does optimism. It was seen as too risky when they drew up the campaign plan.
    Polling day can't come quickly enough for Starmer, he's holding the ming vase on a tightrope right now.
    I mean, yes. Labour would love an election tomorrow (as at any moment since Sept 2022) but Labour's campaign thus far has gone...pretty much according to plan.

    In that they've largely been able to be unobtrusive and what scrutiny they have had over plans has been largely neutered by the Tories' errors. Starmer's personal ratings have modestly ticked up, so have avoided gaffes while introducing him to a wider public.

    Polling has maybe ticked down a bit, but not more than might've been expected and still well past the winning post.

    Reform and Farage has been a bit of a wildcard but one that's not really Labour's problem (at this election at least) and is maybe even helpful in splitting the right and sucking the oxygen away from everything else.

    There were some rows with the left that were ugly, but have largely fizzled out rather than split the party.

    It's not spectacular or pretty, but then winning election campaigns rarely are - as they're not aimed at those who have a strong interest in politics.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 19,369
    I know with my record I'm the last person who should be giving tips but I had a text from a good friend who lives in Islington who tells me she thinks Jeremy is going to lose. The reason I took note is because she was a fan and if she's now going mainstream Labour then I can't think who isn't
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 16,705
    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    This is because governments of both sides have had an obsession with writing policy into law. It's not the fault of the courts when they then enforce this law.

    I've always opposed this. I prefer to see practical policy to achieve the desired end - i.e. investment in zero carbon alternatives - rather than creating a law and calling it job done.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951
    kyf_100 said:

    148grss said:

    OllyT said:

    Right now it is a very confused picture as to whether the Tories are ahead of Reform or vice versa.

    This comes at a point where millions of postal votes will be being cast by a section of the electorate that leans heavily towards elderly Tory/Reform voters. Most of these votes will have been cast before it becomes clear who is the stronger in many seats.

    The worst situation for the right is a relatively even split between Tory and Reform and that appears to be where we are right now. The right needs one or the other to become clearly dominant in the next week or so if it is going to derail a Labour super majority.

    My best case scenario is that the vote shares of both the Tories and Reform are just so inefficiently distributed across parliamentary seats that it fucks them both. Lets say both of them get between 15% - 20% nationally, under FPTP, we could actually see neither party winning any seats. Is that likely, of course not, but it would be hilarious.
    Except of course it would mean Leon winning his bet and we would literally never hear the end of it.
    No, if I win - as now seems likely - my 1000/1 bet with @Sandpit I hereby promise to stop talking about it daily by the summer of 2029
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,410
    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    We are fucked. The Superme Court was a terrible idea and the Judicial Appointments Commission means we have politicised judges whether we like it or not. And mostly leftwing judges: it's yet another hideous and deliberate legacy from New Labour, which the Tories failed to fix, and they had FOURTEEN YEARS to do it

    The Tories must die, Reform or Whoever must take over, and when we get our next chance we basically need a revolution, to sweep the entire blob into the North Sea, judges as well
    They're certainly cut from a different cloth than Lord Denning or even more recently Sumption.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951
    Farooq said:

    deleted, fuck engaging with that wanker

    Awww, it was me, wasn't it?

    I have a 100% track record of winding you the fuck up. It enlivens my mornings, along with caffeine, so I thankyou
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,566
    DougSeal said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Astonishing news that the CCHQ director of campaigns has now taken a leave of absence while his wife - a Con candidate - is being investigated for placing a bet on the date of the election.

    It encapsulates both the incompetence and corruption at the heart of this sorry government (or indeed their contempt for democracy). This is the sort of thing that can cut through as well. They deserve the kicking that is hopefully coming to them.

    I may be in the minority, but is it not possible that those who had a tip about the election genuinely thought there was nothing wrong in using said tip for a wager? I know ignorance of the law (is this is legal thing, or terms and conditions with the betting firm?) is not a defence.

    There also seems to be a grey area. I placed bets on the day that things were leaking out, but before the official announcement. Was that illegal?
    This is politics. Legally (betting law isn't my thing) it might not be a problem. To the untrained eye, including that of this lawyer, it is.
    I think it's a stupid thing to do for sure, but I'm curious to see where this goes legally. Personally, I think bookies lay odds on these things at their own risk.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 116,165

    Ooooh my postal vote has arrived.

    That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.

    My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.

    Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.

    Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!

    I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.

    I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.

    I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
    I always have been loyal to David Cameron even when he said he liked Hawaiian pizzas.

    In fact I have been more loyal to Dave than I was to my wife.

    If Dave wasn’t in government I would be abstaining.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 16,705
    148grss said:

    TimS said:

    Election theory of the day.

    Labour swingback.

    The swingback phenomenon is long standing and well documented. It seems particularly to benefit Conservatives, but we also saw some evidence of it when Labour were in power.

    The idea is that ahead of an election people flirt with change and sending a message to the government. They’re fed up. But when the actual election day looms they consider their options and opt for the devil they know. So you get swingback to the incumbent.

    This year lots of people are flirting with change. In fact the vast majority of the electorate, both in E&W and Scotland. But they are not just looking at Labour and the Lib Dems, the “established opposition parties”. They’re also looking at Reform and Green.

    Over the next two weeks will people start to focus their minds and end up voting more conservatively? Yes, I think they will. It usually happens. But will the beneficiaries in England and Wales be the Tories? Perhaps not exclusively. Starmer and Labour are so much part of the furniture, and what they offer is so non-alarming and dull, that I wonder if they could be the main beneficiaries. A safe option, while still representing change.

    Swingback, but to the main opposition party.

    Just a thought.

    Not a ridiculous idea, but on the whole I disagree.

    Labour are still an unknown quantity. The small c conservative reflex will be to stick with the incumbent government.

    And this is definitely a CHANGE election, but one where Labour aren't offering much in the way of change. That's why Reform are catching so much attention.

    Labour are stuck between two stools. I think their campaign is in real trouble. They really need to come out and rally an anti-Farage vote, but they also need to offer a positive and optimistic vision for people to vote for. But it's too late for Starmer to pull that out of the hat. He doesn't do improv, I don't think he does optimism. It was seen as too risky when they drew up the campaign plan.
    I don't know - I think I agree with @TimS - it seems clear that even many typically Tory voters are exasperated with the party and how it has governed, and I am worried about the polling day cold feet of many typically Labour voters who may be flirting with Greens (from my pov) worrying a "Vote for Greens is a Vote for Tories" and will get squeezed. I think there is a good argument being made here that Labour are so clearly going to get a majority and the Tories are in such trouble that in this election you don't have to necessarily vote tactically to kick out a Tory government - but with those numbers around how many voters want the Tories to get 0 seats, and how I'm sure some constituents with certain MPs have added desires to kick them out in a cross party manner, I do wonder if Labour could even exceed the polls. But we'll have to see!
    The small c conservative swingback could see the Tories recover from 8% to 12% (although my prediction is for higher than that). The existence of a swingback doesn't preclude a wipeout for the Tories, depending on the point at which the swingback starts.

    It is a change election after all.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,566

    Kate Forbes talking pure bollocks on BBC

    It would be more newsworthy if a politician wasn't.
    Well yes, but she is meant to be the Head Haggis but one, a chieftain of finance, yet what she was saying had little to connect it to the world she lives in.
    Alan, she could not have been any worse than tweedledee and tweedledum. How is it possible so many clowns get to these positions, I have yet to hear one that I would trust to run a bath.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,062
    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    We are fucked. The Superme Court was a terrible idea and the Judicial Appointments Commission means we have politicised judges whether we like it or not. And mostly leftwing judges: it's yet another hideous and deliberate legacy from New Labour, which the Tories failed to fix, and they had FOURTEEN YEARS to do it

    The Tories must die, Reform or Whoever must take over, and when we get our next chance we basically need a revolution, to sweep the entire blob into the North Sea, judges as well
    You really are quite dim aren't you? The HoL can and did make similar decisions before Labour rebadged it at the Supreme Court. Administrative law did not begin in 2009.

    As for "judges as well" - how do you expect us to believe your protestations of "not fascist" when you decide that the judiciary is an inconvenience? The legislature next no doubt.

    You really are beneath me. Reading you drops the average IQ 40 points. Being you must send it into negative territory. I don't know why I bother trying to educate you. Shut up and listen to your betters on here and you might learn something.
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 4,004
    kyf_100 said:

    148grss said:

    OllyT said:

    Right now it is a very confused picture as to whether the Tories are ahead of Reform or vice versa.

    This comes at a point where millions of postal votes will be being cast by a section of the electorate that leans heavily towards elderly Tory/Reform voters. Most of these votes will have been cast before it becomes clear who is the stronger in many seats.

    The worst situation for the right is a relatively even split between Tory and Reform and that appears to be where we are right now. The right needs one or the other to become clearly dominant in the next week or so if it is going to derail a Labour super majority.

    My best case scenario is that the vote shares of both the Tories and Reform are just so inefficiently distributed across parliamentary seats that it fucks them both. Lets say both of them get between 15% - 20% nationally, under FPTP, we could actually see neither party winning any seats. Is that likely, of course not, but it would be hilarious.
    Except of course it would mean Leon winning his bet and we would literally never hear the end of it.
    Personally, that's a price I'm willing to pay. Because it's not coming out of my wallet and I can continue to ignore everything that Leon types.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 12,329
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    We are fucked. The Superme Court was a terrible idea and the Judicial Appointments Commission means we have politicised judges whether we like it or not. And mostly leftwing judges: it's yet another hideous and deliberate legacy from New Labour, which the Tories failed to fix, and they had FOURTEEN YEARS to do it

    The Tories must die, Reform or Whoever must take over, and when we get our next chance we basically need a revolution, to sweep the entire blob into the North Sea, judges as well
    You really are quite dim aren't you? The HoL can and did make similar decisions before Labour rebadged it at the Supreme Court. Administrative law did not begin in 2009.

    As for "judges as well" - how do you expect us to believe your protestations of "not fascist" when you decide that the judiciary is an inconvenience? The legislature next no doubt.

    You really are beneath me. Reading you drops the average IQ 40 points. Being you must send it into negative territory. I don't know why I bother trying to educate you. Shut up and listen to your betters on here and you might learn something.
    Ignore him
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966
    SandraMc said:

    Report from the South Coast:

    In the past fortnight we have driven into Chichester from three different routes. Along each route we saw dozens and dozens of Lib Dem posters. I think I might have spotted one Conservative one.

    Today in a very upmarket part of Emsworth I saw two Labour Party posters.

    The tide is turning...

    Tories stopped putting posters up about 20 years ago because they became magnets for vandalism.
  • Options
    Nunu5Nunu5 Posts: 287
    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    It means we will import 100% of our oil and gas

    Another reason why the Tories deserve #zeroseats is because they didn't get rid of this Supreme Court
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,566

    'If someone had inside information and they used that to place a bet - that's bad'

    @michaelgove reacts to news that three people with links to the prime minister allegedly used inside information to bet on the election date


    https://x.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1803717436593619212

    These clowns are so stupid they did not get an unknown 3rd party to put the bets on , explains why the country is circling the drain.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    We are fucked. The Superme Court was a terrible idea and the Judicial Appointments Commission means we have politicised judges whether we like it or not. And mostly leftwing judges: it's yet another hideous and deliberate legacy from New Labour, which the Tories failed to fix, and they had FOURTEEN YEARS to do it

    The Tories must die, Reform or Whoever must take over, and when we get our next chance we basically need a revolution, to sweep the entire blob into the North Sea, judges as well
    You really are quite dim aren't you? The HoL can and did make similar decisions before Labour rebadged it at the Supreme Court. Administrative law did not begin in 2009.

    As for "judges as well" - how do you expect us to believe your protestations of "not fascist" when you decide that the judiciary is an inconvenience? The legislature next no doubt.

    You really are beneath me. Reading you drops the average IQ 40 points. Being you must send it into negative territory. I don't know why I bother trying to educate you. Shut up and listen to your betters on here and you might learn something.
    lol
  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 4,004

    148grss said:

    TimS said:

    Election theory of the day.

    Labour swingback.

    The swingback phenomenon is long standing and well documented. It seems particularly to benefit Conservatives, but we also saw some evidence of it when Labour were in power.

    The idea is that ahead of an election people flirt with change and sending a message to the government. They’re fed up. But when the actual election day looms they consider their options and opt for the devil they know. So you get swingback to the incumbent.

    This year lots of people are flirting with change. In fact the vast majority of the electorate, both in E&W and Scotland. But they are not just looking at Labour and the Lib Dems, the “established opposition parties”. They’re also looking at Reform and Green.

    Over the next two weeks will people start to focus their minds and end up voting more conservatively? Yes, I think they will. It usually happens. But will the beneficiaries in England and Wales be the Tories? Perhaps not exclusively. Starmer and Labour are so much part of the furniture, and what they offer is so non-alarming and dull, that I wonder if they could be the main beneficiaries. A safe option, while still representing change.

    Swingback, but to the main opposition party.

    Just a thought.

    Not a ridiculous idea, but on the whole I disagree.

    Labour are still an unknown quantity. The small c conservative reflex will be to stick with the incumbent government.

    And this is definitely a CHANGE election, but one where Labour aren't offering much in the way of change. That's why Reform are catching so much attention.

    Labour are stuck between two stools. I think their campaign is in real trouble. They really need to come out and rally an anti-Farage vote, but they also need to offer a positive and optimistic vision for people to vote for. But it's too late for Starmer to pull that out of the hat. He doesn't do improv, I don't think he does optimism. It was seen as too risky when they drew up the campaign plan.
    I don't know - I think I agree with @TimS - it seems clear that even many typically Tory voters are exasperated with the party and how it has governed, and I am worried about the polling day cold feet of many typically Labour voters who may be flirting with Greens (from my pov) worrying a "Vote for Greens is a Vote for Tories" and will get squeezed. I think there is a good argument being made here that Labour are so clearly going to get a majority and the Tories are in such trouble that in this election you don't have to necessarily vote tactically to kick out a Tory government - but with those numbers around how many voters want the Tories to get 0 seats, and how I'm sure some constituents with certain MPs have added desires to kick them out in a cross party manner, I do wonder if Labour could even exceed the polls. But we'll have to see!
    The small c conservative swingback could see the Tories recover from 8% to 12% (although my prediction is for higher than that). The existence of a swingback doesn't preclude a wipeout for the Tories, depending on the point at which the swingback starts.

    It is a change election after all.
    I just don't see where that swingback will come from.

    Roughly a quarter of 2019 Con voters want the party to get 0 seats. Many Con voters prefer Farage to Sunak as PM. And those on the other end have nothing to obviously fear from a Starmer Labour party - and wouldn't trust the Tories to be the ones to stop them if they did. We saw under May at the EU elections a result of 19% - I think that is going to be the ceiling for the party rather than the floor this election; that is the core vote share that care enough about the Tory brand specifically. (Yes I know EU election turnout is different and people voted differently because it wasn't fptp and was seen more as an election where protest votes can be cast - but I think this GE is seeing voters equally willing to "protest" vote).
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,323
    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    We are fucked. The Superme Court was a terrible idea and the Judicial Appointments Commission means we have politicised judges whether we like it or not. And mostly leftwing judges: it's yet another hideous and deliberate legacy from New Labour, which the Tories failed to fix, and they had FOURTEEN YEARS to do it

    The Tories must die, Reform or Whoever must take over, and when we get our next chance we basically need a revolution, to sweep the entire blob into the North Sea, judges as well
    They're certainly cut from a different cloth than Lord Denning or even more recently Sumption.
    The plain idiocy of that ruling is off the scale. As MorrisDancer says (above) "… we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way."

  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,446

    Ooooh my postal vote has arrived.

    That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.

    My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.

    Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.

    Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!

    I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.

    I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.

    I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
    My view entirely. The idea that the Tories somehow deserve to retain the position of foreign secretary even after what looks likely to be a monumental going over from the electorate is symptomatic of the born to rule arrogance that has helped to propel them to this sorry state.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 19,369

    Ooooh my postal vote has arrived.

    That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.

    My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.

    Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.

    Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!

    I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.

    I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.

    I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
    The number of people I know who are voting Tory is quite extraordinary. I think it's one of those habits that are hard to break. If it wasn't for PB and my belief in polls I would be putting my house on at least a hung parliament
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966
    edited June 20
    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951
    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    That's got to be the shittest forecast of the day. Not a single poll predicts anything like this outcome, AFAIK
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,523
    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    TimS said:

    Election theory of the day.

    Labour swingback.

    The swingback phenomenon is long standing and well documented. It seems particularly to benefit Conservatives, but we also saw some evidence of it when Labour were in power.

    The idea is that ahead of an election people flirt with change and sending a message to the government. They’re fed up. But when the actual election day looms they consider their options and opt for the devil they know. So you get swingback to the incumbent.

    This year lots of people are flirting with change. In fact the vast majority of the electorate, both in E&W and Scotland. But they are not just looking at Labour and the Lib Dems, the “established opposition parties”. They’re also looking at Reform and Green.

    Over the next two weeks will people start to focus their minds and end up voting more conservatively? Yes, I think they will. It usually happens. But will the beneficiaries in England and Wales be the Tories? Perhaps not exclusively. Starmer and Labour are so much part of the furniture, and what they offer is so non-alarming and dull, that I wonder if they could be the main beneficiaries. A safe option, while still representing change.

    Swingback, but to the main opposition party.

    Just a thought.

    Not a ridiculous idea, but on the whole I disagree.

    Labour are still an unknown quantity. The small c conservative reflex will be to stick with the incumbent government.

    And this is definitely a CHANGE election, but one where Labour aren't offering much in the way of change. That's why Reform are catching so much attention.

    Labour are stuck between two stools. I think their campaign is in real trouble. They really need to come out and rally an anti-Farage vote, but they also need to offer a positive and optimistic vision for people to vote for. But it's too late for Starmer to pull that out of the hat. He doesn't do improv, I don't think he does optimism. It was seen as too risky when they drew up the campaign plan.
    I don't know - I think I agree with @TimS - it seems clear that even many typically Tory voters are exasperated with the party and how it has governed, and I am worried about the polling day cold feet of many typically Labour voters who may be flirting with Greens (from my pov) worrying a "Vote for Greens is a Vote for Tories" and will get squeezed. I think there is a good argument being made here that Labour are so clearly going to get a majority and the Tories are in such trouble that in this election you don't have to necessarily vote tactically to kick out a Tory government - but with those numbers around how many voters want the Tories to get 0 seats, and how I'm sure some constituents with certain MPs have added desires to kick them out in a cross party manner, I do wonder if Labour could even exceed the polls. But we'll have to see!
    The small c conservative swingback could see the Tories recover from 8% to 12% (although my prediction is for higher than that). The existence of a swingback doesn't preclude a wipeout for the Tories, depending on the point at which the swingback starts.

    It is a change election after all.
    I just don't see where that swingback will come from.

    Roughly a quarter of 2019 Con voters want the party to get 0 seats. Many Con voters prefer Farage to Sunak as PM. And those on the other end have nothing to obviously fear from a Starmer Labour party - and wouldn't trust the Tories to be the ones to stop them if they did. We saw under May at the EU elections a result of 19% - I think that is going to be the ceiling for the party rather than the floor this election; that is the core vote share that care enough about the Tory brand specifically. (Yes I know EU election turnout is different and people voted differently because it wasn't fptp and was seen more as an election where protest votes can be cast - but I think this GE is seeing voters equally willing to "protest" vote).
    The Tories got 9% in the 2019 EU parliament elections, the Brexit Party 31%

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_European_Parliament_election_in_the_United_Kingdom
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 21,631
    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    UNS and no tactical voting. Not what I would choose for this particular election.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 28,966

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    UNS and no tactical voting. Not what I would choose for this particular election.
    Maybe it'll unexpectedly turn out to be the most accurate forecast.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,323
    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    That's got to be the shittest forecast of the day. Not a single poll predicts anything like this outcome, AFAIK
    … and that makes it the "shittiest"? Are you a herder-conformist?

  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 4,004
    HYUFD said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    TimS said:

    Election theory of the day.

    Labour swingback.

    The swingback phenomenon is long standing and well documented. It seems particularly to benefit Conservatives, but we also saw some evidence of it when Labour were in power.

    The idea is that ahead of an election people flirt with change and sending a message to the government. They’re fed up. But when the actual election day looms they consider their options and opt for the devil they know. So you get swingback to the incumbent.

    This year lots of people are flirting with change. In fact the vast majority of the electorate, both in E&W and Scotland. But they are not just looking at Labour and the Lib Dems, the “established opposition parties”. They’re also looking at Reform and Green.

    Over the next two weeks will people start to focus their minds and end up voting more conservatively? Yes, I think they will. It usually happens. But will the beneficiaries in England and Wales be the Tories? Perhaps not exclusively. Starmer and Labour are so much part of the furniture, and what they offer is so non-alarming and dull, that I wonder if they could be the main beneficiaries. A safe option, while still representing change.

    Swingback, but to the main opposition party.

    Just a thought.

    Not a ridiculous idea, but on the whole I disagree.

    Labour are still an unknown quantity. The small c conservative reflex will be to stick with the incumbent government.

    And this is definitely a CHANGE election, but one where Labour aren't offering much in the way of change. That's why Reform are catching so much attention.

    Labour are stuck between two stools. I think their campaign is in real trouble. They really need to come out and rally an anti-Farage vote, but they also need to offer a positive and optimistic vision for people to vote for. But it's too late for Starmer to pull that out of the hat. He doesn't do improv, I don't think he does optimism. It was seen as too risky when they drew up the campaign plan.
    I don't know - I think I agree with @TimS - it seems clear that even many typically Tory voters are exasperated with the party and how it has governed, and I am worried about the polling day cold feet of many typically Labour voters who may be flirting with Greens (from my pov) worrying a "Vote for Greens is a Vote for Tories" and will get squeezed. I think there is a good argument being made here that Labour are so clearly going to get a majority and the Tories are in such trouble that in this election you don't have to necessarily vote tactically to kick out a Tory government - but with those numbers around how many voters want the Tories to get 0 seats, and how I'm sure some constituents with certain MPs have added desires to kick them out in a cross party manner, I do wonder if Labour could even exceed the polls. But we'll have to see!
    The small c conservative swingback could see the Tories recover from 8% to 12% (although my prediction is for higher than that). The existence of a swingback doesn't preclude a wipeout for the Tories, depending on the point at which the swingback starts.

    It is a change election after all.
    I just don't see where that swingback will come from.

    Roughly a quarter of 2019 Con voters want the party to get 0 seats. Many Con voters prefer Farage to Sunak as PM. And those on the other end have nothing to obviously fear from a Starmer Labour party - and wouldn't trust the Tories to be the ones to stop them if they did. We saw under May at the EU elections a result of 19% - I think that is going to be the ceiling for the party rather than the floor this election; that is the core vote share that care enough about the Tory brand specifically. (Yes I know EU election turnout is different and people voted differently because it wasn't fptp and was seen more as an election where protest votes can be cast - but I think this GE is seeing voters equally willing to "protest" vote).
    The Tories got 9% in the 2019 EU parliament elections, the Brexit Party 31%

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_European_Parliament_election_in_the_United_Kingdom
    Apologies, I misremembered, which does change my thinking - 9% is the floor then, not the ceiling. I hope it doesn't go that low, because that would mean Reform winning seats.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,410
    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    Their model is a nonsense for the Reform vote, it's predicted higher in Bassetlaw than Clacton. Now I think Reform may well do well in my constituency but the idea their share will be higher than Clacton is for the birds.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 19,369
    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    I hope the 20/1 Tories to get between 200-250 is still available
  • Options
    jamesdoylejamesdoyle Posts: 728

    Carnyx said:



    And just like that The Crow Road, bookshop of Arundel, is live.

    Will you be featuring Iain Banks books?
    And Iain M. Banks?
    I was once on a whisky drinking panel with Iain Banks.

    (A slightly weird claim to 'fame'...)
    My Iain Banks story also involves whisky...

    1987, the World Science Fiction Convention was held in Brighton. Somehow, at some point, after a panel discussion I ended up with a group of a dozen or fifteen fans drinking (whisky of course) in the hotel bar with the man himself.
    A lot of whisky was drunk.
    As the evening wore on, Iain announced he needed to go back to his room, and said good night. We all wandered out of the front door with him, whereon he paused, looked around, and said, 'We've just come out of my hotel. My room is back in there.'
    He looked up at the front of the hotel, counting storeys, and pointed at a balcony on the third or fourth floor. 'That's my room!' .
    Whereon, with much encouragement from us drunkards, he climbed up the facade, balcony to balcony, up to his room, and waved us goodnight.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,345
    edited June 20
    This is a potty decision,

    Landmark ruling could threaten future UK oil drilling
    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    If Starmer pushes through the legal framework in which government / councils need to always consider reducing inequality, we will be seeing loads of similar legal action. Even the Shit Law Project might win some cases.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,180
    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    At this point it's becoming downright irresponsible to put out dashed-off-in-five-minutes constituency projections like that. You just know some chasing-fourth-place muppet, of whatever party, is right now printing off a whole bunch of leaflets saying "The Economist says we're the only challengers here".
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 21,631
    edited June 20
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    UNS and no tactical voting. Not what I would choose for this particular election.
    Maybe it'll unexpectedly turn out to be the most accurate forecast.
    Definitely wouldn't rule it out. This will be the hardest election to model for ages and all approaches have their weakenesses, but it still feels the wrong approach for me.

    I think anti-Tory is a bigger bloc than pro-Labour let alone pro-LD or Reform so tactical voting in particular is hard to ignore.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,568
    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    That's got to be the shittest forecast of the day. Not a single poll predicts anything like this outcome, AFAIK
    That's what I was predicting roughly before Rain man, DDay, Faragasm, betting tossers, almost all Tories being morons, National Arse Service, etc etc etc.
    Goobers.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,523
    edited June 20
    148grss said:

    HYUFD said:

    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    TimS said:

    Election theory of the day.

    Labour swingback.

    The swingback phenomenon is long standing and well documented. It seems particularly to benefit Conservatives, but we also saw some evidence of it when Labour were in power.

    The idea is that ahead of an election people flirt with change and sending a message to the government. They’re fed up. But when the actual election day looms they consider their options and opt for the devil they know. So you get swingback to the incumbent.

    This year lots of people are flirting with change. In fact the vast majority of the electorate, both in E&W and Scotland. But they are not just looking at Labour and the Lib Dems, the “established opposition parties”. They’re also looking at Reform and Green.

    Over the next two weeks will people start to focus their minds and end up voting more conservatively? Yes, I think they will. It usually happens. But will the beneficiaries in England and Wales be the Tories? Perhaps not exclusively. Starmer and Labour are so much part of the furniture, and what they offer is so non-alarming and dull, that I wonder if they could be the main beneficiaries. A safe option, while still representing change.

    Swingback, but to the main opposition party.

    Just a thought.

    Not a ridiculous idea, but on the whole I disagree.

    Labour are still an unknown quantity. The small c conservative reflex will be to stick with the incumbent government.

    And this is definitely a CHANGE election, but one where Labour aren't offering much in the way of change. That's why Reform are catching so much attention.

    Labour are stuck between two stools. I think their campaign is in real trouble. They really need to come out and rally an anti-Farage vote, but they also need to offer a positive and optimistic vision for people to vote for. But it's too late for Starmer to pull that out of the hat. He doesn't do improv, I don't think he does optimism. It was seen as too risky when they drew up the campaign plan.
    I don't know - I think I agree with @TimS - it seems clear that even many typically Tory voters are exasperated with the party and how it has governed, and I am worried about the polling day cold feet of many typically Labour voters who may be flirting with Greens (from my pov) worrying a "Vote for Greens is a Vote for Tories" and will get squeezed. I think there is a good argument being made here that Labour are so clearly going to get a majority and the Tories are in such trouble that in this election you don't have to necessarily vote tactically to kick out a Tory government - but with those numbers around how many voters want the Tories to get 0 seats, and how I'm sure some constituents with certain MPs have added desires to kick them out in a cross party manner, I do wonder if Labour could even exceed the polls. But we'll have to see!
    The small c conservative swingback could see the Tories recover from 8% to 12% (although my prediction is for higher than that). The existence of a swingback doesn't preclude a wipeout for the Tories, depending on the point at which the swingback starts.

    It is a change election after all.
    I just don't see where that swingback will come from.

    Roughly a quarter of 2019 Con voters want the party to get 0 seats. Many Con voters prefer Farage to Sunak as PM. And those on the other end have nothing to obviously fear from a Starmer Labour party - and wouldn't trust the Tories to be the ones to stop them if they did. We saw under May at the EU elections a result of 19% - I think that is going to be the ceiling for the party rather than the floor this election; that is the core vote share that care enough about the Tory brand specifically. (Yes I know EU election turnout is different and people voted differently because it wasn't fptp and was seen more as an election where protest votes can be cast - but I think this GE is seeing voters equally willing to "protest" vote).
    The Tories got 9% in the 2019 EU parliament elections, the Brexit Party 31%

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_European_Parliament_election_in_the_United_Kingdom
    Apologies, I misremembered, which does change my thinking - 9% is the floor then, not the ceiling. I hope it doesn't go that low, because that would mean Reform winning seats.
    Yes, if Labour got 35% say as per the new Goodwin poll, Reform 31% as in the EU elections, the LDs 12%, the Tories 9% and Greens 5% then Labour would get 315 seats, Reform 246 seats, the LDs 36, the SNP 21, the Tories 6 and Greens 2.

    It would be a hung parliament, Labour largest party and Starmer PM but with Farage Leader of the Opposition

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=9&LAB=35&LIB=12&Reform=31&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=15.2&SCOTLAB=36.7&SCOTLIB=6.9&SCOTReform=3.2&SCOTGreen=2.5&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=33.1&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019nbbase
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951
    Roger said:

    Ooooh my postal vote has arrived.

    That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.

    My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.

    Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.

    Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!

    I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.

    I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.

    I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
    The number of people I know who are voting Tory is quite extraordinary. I think it's one of those habits that are hard to break. If it wasn't for PB and my belief in polls I would be putting my house on at least a hung parliament
    Roger, you're a wealthy retired tampon ad executive, educated at a minor public school, who mainly lives in Villefranche-sur-Mer

    Your social circle is probably quite unusual, and may indeed be limited to 24/7 private nurses

    I have a wide circle of friends and family, home and abroad, rich and poor, who are a real mix, arty and geeky, you name it. In the past they've been everything from SWP to BNP, but mainly Labour and Tory, with a couple of Libs, Nits and UKIPs

    Not a single one is definitely voting Tory. One was edging that way but the Reform Manifesto has tempted her to Farage

    I can therefore believe these stories of total wipe-out (sorry @Sandpit). Unless there is a shy Tory effect at work, but I don't believe it, people aren't embarrassed about voting Tory or not voting Tory, they just despise them, quietly or loudly. A shy Reform vote is more likely, because Farage
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 16,705
    edited June 20
    Nunu5 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    It means we will import 100% of our oil and gas

    Another reason why the Tories deserve #zeroseats is because they didn't get rid of this Supreme Court
    100% of zero* is zero. The important thing to focus on is to stop burning oil and gas by implementing better technologies.

    *I know we have plenty of other uses for oil and gas besides combustion, but still.
  • Options
    TweedledeeTweedledee Posts: 486
    Mind you UKOG was always a pretty iffy proposition. I believe lots of ukippers invested their life savings at 300p - it ticked both the climate hoax and patriot boxes - and learnt how 300 can become 001 overnight.
  • Options
    johntjohnt Posts: 140
    I wonder if there is a betting market on how long Lee Anderson will be a member of reform if he and Farage both end up as reform MPs on July 5th. I cannot see it lasting long as neither of them seems to have the ability to get on with anyone else. The idea of the two of them as the only two reform MPs would be wonderful to watch. The only question would be would he stomp off in a huff or would Farage fire him.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951
    geoffw said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    That's got to be the shittest forecast of the day. Not a single poll predicts anything like this outcome, AFAIK
    … and that makes it the "shittiest"? Are you a herder-conformist?

    Not "shittiest", "shittest". It's funnier
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 16,705
    edited June 20
    148grss said:

    148grss said:

    TimS said:

    Election theory of the day.

    Labour swingback.

    The swingback phenomenon is long standing and well documented. It seems particularly to benefit Conservatives, but we also saw some evidence of it when Labour were in power.

    The idea is that ahead of an election people flirt with change and sending a message to the government. They’re fed up. But when the actual election day looms they consider their options and opt for the devil they know. So you get swingback to the incumbent.

    This year lots of people are flirting with change. In fact the vast majority of the electorate, both in E&W and Scotland. But they are not just looking at Labour and the Lib Dems, the “established opposition parties”. They’re also looking at Reform and Green.

    Over the next two weeks will people start to focus their minds and end up voting more conservatively? Yes, I think they will. It usually happens. But will the beneficiaries in England and Wales be the Tories? Perhaps not exclusively. Starmer and Labour are so much part of the furniture, and what they offer is so non-alarming and dull, that I wonder if they could be the main beneficiaries. A safe option, while still representing change.

    Swingback, but to the main opposition party.

    Just a thought.

    Not a ridiculous idea, but on the whole I disagree.

    Labour are still an unknown quantity. The small c conservative reflex will be to stick with the incumbent government.

    And this is definitely a CHANGE election, but one where Labour aren't offering much in the way of change. That's why Reform are catching so much attention.

    Labour are stuck between two stools. I think their campaign is in real trouble. They really need to come out and rally an anti-Farage vote, but they also need to offer a positive and optimistic vision for people to vote for. But it's too late for Starmer to pull that out of the hat. He doesn't do improv, I don't think he does optimism. It was seen as too risky when they drew up the campaign plan.
    I don't know - I think I agree with @TimS - it seems clear that even many typically Tory voters are exasperated with the party and how it has governed, and I am worried about the polling day cold feet of many typically Labour voters who may be flirting with Greens (from my pov) worrying a "Vote for Greens is a Vote for Tories" and will get squeezed. I think there is a good argument being made here that Labour are so clearly going to get a majority and the Tories are in such trouble that in this election you don't have to necessarily vote tactically to kick out a Tory government - but with those numbers around how many voters want the Tories to get 0 seats, and how I'm sure some constituents with certain MPs have added desires to kick them out in a cross party manner, I do wonder if Labour could even exceed the polls. But we'll have to see!
    The small c conservative swingback could see the Tories recover from 8% to 12% (although my prediction is for higher than that). The existence of a swingback doesn't preclude a wipeout for the Tories, depending on the point at which the swingback starts.

    It is a change election after all.
    I just don't see where that swingback will come from.

    Roughly a quarter of 2019 Con voters want the party to get 0 seats. Many Con voters prefer Farage to Sunak as PM. And those on the other end have nothing to obviously fear from a Starmer Labour party - and wouldn't trust the Tories to be the ones to stop them if they did. We saw under May at the EU elections a result of 19% - I think that is going to be the ceiling for the party rather than the floor this election; that is the core vote share that care enough about the Tory brand specifically. (Yes I know EU election turnout is different and people voted differently because it wasn't fptp and was seen more as an election where protest votes can be cast - but I think this GE is seeing voters equally willing to "protest" vote).
    We can see it in posters on PB.com, who have rationalised a way for them to vote Tory. Lots of others will do the same.

    EDIT: 8.8% for the Tories in the 2019 EU election.
  • Options
    Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,040
    kjh said:

    kjh said:

    Dopermean said:

    Surely the health warning on betting based on Lib Dem leaflets is in even bigger than MRPs :)?
    In my area the Lib Dems have been saying it's not a Labour target, but the Labour office was buzzing on a Saturday morning while their office was closed. May not be the same in Tewkesbury of course.

    I would rely on the LD leaflet count more than the MRP. We don't waste leaflets on non targets. The most you will get is the Royal Mail delivery and possibly a national leaflet.
    Nice article @Peter_the_Punter. I wrote the above before reading your article which I agree with completely. A better guide than MRP, which appears to struggle with such high national Lab polling and such low national LD polling for the seats where the LDs are potential challengers. If LDs are really working it and Lab aren't then an MRP that makes Lab the challenger is nonsense.

    The real difficulty is where both are going for it, like we are hearing about Wantage and Didcot which has been argued about on here. Anecdotally, as I posted yesterday, from someone I know there, they have had loads of LD leaflets, yet no Lab ones, so it will be interesting to see who the challenger is/was there after the election. Worth a note that they have also not had any Tory leaflets.
    Thank Kjh.

    Yes, it's easy to see where MRP struggles. They don't take make account of quality of candidate either. For example, they regard the LD as a shoo-in in my neighbouring constituency of Cheltenham but the incumbent Alex Chalk has such a good reputation I wouldn't want to be taking short odds on it.

    Here in Winchcombe, I've had leaflets from the Tories, LDs and Greens. Nothing from Labour, although to my surprise I did see a Red poster in the High Street. The Greens, by the way, have a good candidate. The Reform guy is little more than token. Neither fact will help the LD's chances, but when I contacted the candidate, Cameron Thomas, a few days ago he reported the campaign to be 'going well'.

    I am sure the LDs will get a good result here, but whether or not they win the cigar.....
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,418

    kjh said:


    2nd bit of feedback from Wantage and Didcot ( @Andy_Cooke and @NickPalmer ). Again another member of the campaign I am involved in who are non political but very interested in who gets elected for obvious reasons. The current Tory MP has been a champion for our cause.


    "I have had campaign leaflets from Labour and the SDP, plus several leaflets from the Liberal Democrats.

    The Liberal Democrats are making quite in effort in Wantage, and seem to regard this as one of their target seats."

    Thanks, kjh - always useful to get the feel of whether or not we're cutting through.
    There are countless LibDem leaflets, which mostly are generic (not referring to the candidate) - on a given day, residents may receive 2 different ones: they are slightly overdoing it IMO. There are fairly widespread Labour leaflets and some SDP leaflets, but none so far from the Tories, who seem to have given up. LibDem posters were up first and are moderately common, though less so than in previous seats where I've been aqctive. Labour posters are catching up. I've yet to see a single Tory poster. Constituency polling varies between a smalle Labour lead to a large LibDem lead; I've yet to see a Tory lead predicted by any of them. Labour is working hard and in with a reasonable shot - but there are masses of tactical anti-Tory voters still making up their minds.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,345
    edited June 20
    The fact the CCHQ workers are keeping silent suggests that their bet on the GE date probably wasn't £50. If it was a very small amount you can probably excuse it away.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,180

    kjh said:


    2nd bit of feedback from Wantage and Didcot ( @Andy_Cooke and @NickPalmer ). Again another member of the campaign I am involved in who are non political but very interested in who gets elected for obvious reasons. The current Tory MP has been a champion for our cause.


    "I have had campaign leaflets from Labour and the SDP, plus several leaflets from the Liberal Democrats.

    The Liberal Democrats are making quite in effort in Wantage, and seem to regard this as one of their target seats."

    Thanks, kjh - always useful to get the feel of whether or not we're cutting through.
    There are countless LibDem leaflets, which mostly are generic (not referring to the candidate) - on a given day, residents may receive 2 different ones: they are slightly overdoing it IMO. There are fairly widespread Labour leaflets and some SDP leaflets, but none so far from the Tories, who seem to have given up. LibDem posters were up first and are moderately common, though less so than in previous seats where I've been aqctive. Labour posters are catching up. I've yet to see a single Tory poster. Constituency polling varies between a smalle Labour lead to a large LibDem lead; I've yet to see a Tory lead predicted by any of them. Labour is working hard and in with a reasonable shot - but there are masses of tactical anti-Tory voters still making up their minds.
    There is no "constituency polling" in Didcot & Wantage, at least not that has been made public.

    There are MRPs. Projections. These are not the same thing.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    That's got to be the shittest forecast of the day. Not a single poll predicts anything like this outcome, AFAIK
    That's what I was predicting roughly before Rain man, DDay, Faragasm, betting tossers, almost all Tories being morons, National Arse Service, etc etc etc.
    Goobers.
    Plus the surge of Reform

    Speaking of which, we NEED A POLL to see if Goodwin's mad outlier was indeed a mad outlier
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,323
     
    Leon said:

    geoffw said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    That's got to be the shittest forecast of the day. Not a single poll predicts anything like this outcome, AFAIK
    … and that makes it the "shittiest"? Are you a herder-conformist?

    Not "shittiest", "shittest". It's funnier
    You can keep that

  • Options
    148grss148grss Posts: 4,004
    johnt said:

    I wonder if there is a betting market on how long Lee Anderson will be a member of reform if he and Farage both end up as reform MPs on July 5th. I cannot see it lasting long as neither of them seems to have the ability to get on with anyone else. The idea of the two of them as the only two reform MPs would be wonderful to watch. The only question would be would he stomp off in a huff or would Farage fire him.

    I just assume that if Farage gets into Parliament that Reform won't exist in the way it does now, anyway. I think Farage will become leader of what is left of the Tory party, or Reform and some of the right wing Tories will merge and create a Reform 2.0 party.
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,399
    Andy_JS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    UNS and no tactical voting. Not what I would choose for this particular election.
    Maybe it'll unexpectedly turn out to be the most accurate forecast.
    “The model is trained on historic voting behaviour between 1959 and 2019. It does not take into account tactical voting or the effects of parties' campaigns in individual constituencies”.

    Not really sure what that means. If trained on previous elections there’s some tactical voting baked in.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,776
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 26,189

    Ooooh my postal vote has arrived.

    That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.

    My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.

    Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.

    Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!

    I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.

    I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.

    I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
    I always have been loyal to David Cameron even when he said he liked Hawaiian pizzas.

    In fact I have been more loyal to Dave than I was to my wife.

    If Dave wasn’t in government I would be abstaining.
    So you are voting for a local candidate based on the random appointment of David Cameron as Foreign Secretary because the Government had run out of people of appropriate stature
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,521

    This is a potty decision,

    Landmark ruling could threaten future UK oil drilling
    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    If Starmer pushes through the legal framework in which government / councils need to always consider reducing inequality, we will be seeing loads of similar legal action. Even the Shit Law Project might win some cases.

    From the depths of my memory, there was something dubbed "socialism in one clause" which Gordon Brown tried to introduce as PM, but which he backed off from in the end.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,413
    Leon said:

    Roger said:

    Ooooh my postal vote has arrived.

    That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.

    My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.

    Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.

    Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!

    I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.

    I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.

    I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
    The number of people I know who are voting Tory is quite extraordinary. I think it's one of those habits that are hard to break. If it wasn't for PB and my belief in polls I would be putting my house on at least a hung parliament
    Roger, you're a wealthy retired tampon ad executive, educated at a minor public school, who mainly lives in Villefranche-sur-Mer

    Your social circle is probably quite unusual, and may indeed be limited to 24/7 private nurses

    I have a wide circle of friends and family, home and abroad, rich and poor, who are a real mix, arty and geeky, you name it. In the past they've been everything from SWP to BNP, but mainly Labour and Tory, with a couple of Libs, Nits and UKIPs

    Not a single one is definitely voting Tory. One was edging that way but the Reform Manifesto has tempted her to Farage

    I can therefore believe these stories of total wipe-out (sorry @Sandpit). Unless there is a shy Tory effect at work, but I don't believe it, people aren't embarrassed about voting Tory or not voting Tory, they just despise them, quietly or loudly. A shy Reform vote is more likely, because Farage
    Exactly what I was saying yesterday.

    A lot of people don't want to come out for Farage as supporting Reform is like saying toilet or serviette. Not the done thing.

    So a lot of people will be saying Conservative, even to the pollsters, and perhaps believing it themselves. But if enough people start openly supporting Reform, the love that dare not speak its name - may become a lot more open.

    People will be hosting coming out parties. Oh, you're Reform? Me too! I just couldn't admit my secret yearnings in a Reformophobic country... but now everyone's doing it... they will be having Reform Pride marches. Jackboots and all.

    Err, well maybe not, but you get my point. Once the dam breaks, it breaks. And I get the sense that we're very close to that happening.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,180
    eek said:

    Ooooh my postal vote has arrived.

    That's one vote for the Tories in Sheffield Hallam.

    My vote is 100% influenced by wanting to keep His Excellency The Right Honourable The Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton as Foreign Secretary.

    Oh aye, like that’s gonna happen.

    Didn’t you previously say you were minded not to vote Tory? Are you Big G-like in your flip floppery?!

    I’m only joshing, I don’t blame you, or him, for returning to the fold. You both seem to have longstanding, heartfelt, tribal feelings for the party. It’s not something I understand personally, but it must be difficult to see an organisation you have such an affinity, a connection, with in such deep, deep shit.

    I’ll never forgive the Tories for what they’ve done to this country for the last 14 years, for the damage austerity has brought to my part of the Red Wall, the closed libraries and sports centres, the crumbling public realm, the hard-pressed public services, the slow, wilful destruction of the NHS. And I’ll never forgive them for stripping me of my European citizenship and Freedom of Movement, for their weakness in standing up to their nutters.

    I want them to get a good fucking hammering. I want their handling of the last 14 years to be clearly, unequivocally, decisively rejected by the public. I want them to be chastened, to have their time in the wilderness, to renew. But I don’t want them destroyed. Because as bad as they are - and I hate the party with a passion even though I have plenty of Tory friends -Farage is worse.
    I always have been loyal to David Cameron even when he said he liked Hawaiian pizzas.

    In fact I have been more loyal to Dave than I was to my wife.

    If Dave wasn’t in government I would be abstaining.
    So you are voting for a local candidate based on the random appointment of David Cameron as Foreign Secretary because the Government had run out of people of appropriate stature
    Careful, I got called "demeaning" yesterday when referring to the Prime Minister's stature.
  • Options
    wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 9,568
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    That's got to be the shittest forecast of the day. Not a single poll predicts anything like this outcome, AFAIK
    That's what I was predicting roughly before Rain man, DDay, Faragasm, betting tossers, almost all Tories being morons, National Arse Service, etc etc etc.
    Goobers.
    Plus the surge of Reform

    Speaking of which, we NEED A POLL to see if Goodwin's mad outlier was indeed a mad outlier
    YouGov tomorrow or tonight should be interesting! Along with Redfield if they do one today
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 49,951
    geoffw said:

     

    Leon said:

    geoffw said:

    Leon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Updated Economist forecast

    Lab 383
    Con 184
    SNP 28
    LD 23
    Grn 1
    Ref 0

    https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast

    That's got to be the shittest forecast of the day. Not a single poll predicts anything like this outcome, AFAIK
    … and that makes it the "shittiest"? Are you a herder-conformist?

    Not "shittiest", "shittest". It's funnier
    You can keep that

    I have to amuse myself somehow, there's only so much fun to be had in goading low watt pea-brains like @Farooq and @DougSeal

    The alternative, I suppose, is that I ACTUALLY DO SOME WORK

    *sigh*

    Work it is

    Later
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 59,550

    This election has to be the one where there has been the least discussion of policy I can remember. What policy has even garnered any attention, the stupid national service one.

    I reckon most people would struggle to even name any other policies from any parties.

    Yep. Although I wonder whether we forgot how poor each GE on policy discussion was with each passing cycle?
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 26,189

    The fact the CCHQ workers are keeping silent suggests that their bet on the GE date probably wasn't £50. If it was a very small amount you can probably excuse it away.

    You really can’t - tricking £5 out of someone based on confidential inside information is no different from tricking £100,000 out of them.

    I just can’t believe they were that f*88ing stupid
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,814

    This is a potty decision,

    Landmark ruling could threaten future UK oil drilling
    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    If Starmer pushes through the legal framework in which government / councils need to always consider reducing inequality, we will be seeing loads of similar legal action. Even the Shit Law Project might win some cases.

    Not really. The UK is still self-reliant for petrol, and 70% ish for crude (with imports from friendly countries like Norway) so any additional drilling will simply slow the transition of economy to renewables and prolong our market exposure to global arseholes.

    Gas is much more contentious.
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,024
    It's such uncharted territory, for a GE campaign at least, that I'm increasingly unconvinced we'll necessarily be that much the wiser when the Exit Poll comes out, that could easily be +/-40 on Lab, +/-60 on Con seats, +/-20 on LD and Reform seats, +/- 15 on left of Labour seats, +/-8 on SNP seats.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,345
    edited June 20
    eek said:

    The fact the CCHQ workers are keeping silent suggests that their bet on the GE date probably wasn't £50. If it was a very small amount you can probably excuse it away.

    You really can’t - tricking £5 out of someone based on confidential inside information is no different from tricking £100,000 out of them.

    I just can’t believe they were that f*88ing stupid
    I meant politically. The numpty bag carrier, if it had just been him, it wasn't really a big story. He was able to wave it away as a silly £100 bet and the media moved on.

    As for stupidity, absolutely. Not only if there were any checks will you get picked up, but you can't even get life changing money on these novelty markets.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,371
    DougSeal said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Astonishing news that the CCHQ director of campaigns has now taken a leave of absence while his wife - a Con candidate - is being investigated for placing a bet on the date of the election.

    It encapsulates both the incompetence and corruption at the heart of this sorry government (or indeed their contempt for democracy). This is the sort of thing that can cut through as well. They deserve the kicking that is hopefully coming to them.

    I may be in the minority, but is it not possible that those who had a tip about the election genuinely thought there was nothing wrong in using said tip for a wager? I know ignorance of the law (is this is legal thing, or terms and conditions with the betting firm?) is not a defence.

    There also seems to be a grey area. I placed bets on the day that things were leaking out, but before the official announcement. Was that illegal?
    This is politics. Legally (betting law isn't my thing) it might not be a problem. To the untrained eye, including that of this lawyer, it is.
    A parallel which may be useful is the law of theft. To be theft, the action has to be 'dishonest' since appropriating property belonging to another (drinking a can of coke from my friend's mum's kitchen without asking anyone on a single occasion, picking up a single golf ball on a golf course with no players apparently around) will not be dishonest, even though it it otherwise theft.

    English law wisely leaves this question to the magistrate/jury. I think it will do the same here. There is a grey area between 'DYOR' and 'inside information'.
  • Options
    DumbosaurusDumbosaurus Posts: 334
    On the assumption that the Supreme Court are trained judges who know how to interpret the law, surely the issue is the law (and the lawmakers), not the court.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 21,541
    148grss said:

    TimS said:

    Election theory of the day.

    Labour swingback.

    The swingback phenomenon is long standing and well documented. It seems particularly to benefit Conservatives, but we also saw some evidence of it when Labour were in power.

    The idea is that ahead of an election people flirt with change and sending a message to the government. They’re fed up. But when the actual election day looms they consider their options and opt for the devil they know. So you get swingback to the incumbent.

    This year lots of people are flirting with change. In fact the vast majority of the electorate, both in E&W and Scotland. But they are not just looking at Labour and the Lib Dems, the “established opposition parties”. They’re also looking at Reform and Green.

    Over the next two weeks will people start to focus their minds and end up voting more conservatively? Yes, I think they will. It usually happens. But will the beneficiaries in England and Wales be the Tories? Perhaps not exclusively. Starmer and Labour are so much part of the furniture, and what they offer is so non-alarming and dull, that I wonder if they could be the main beneficiaries. A safe option, while still representing change.

    Swingback, but to the main opposition party.

    Just a thought.

    Not a ridiculous idea, but on the whole I disagree.

    Labour are still an unknown quantity. The small c conservative reflex will be to stick with the incumbent government.

    And this is definitely a CHANGE election, but one where Labour aren't offering much in the way of change. That's why Reform are catching so much attention.

    Labour are stuck between two stools. I think their campaign is in real trouble. They really need to come out and rally an anti-Farage vote, but they also need to offer a positive and optimistic vision for people to vote for. But it's too late for Starmer to pull that out of the hat. He doesn't do improv, I don't think he does optimism. It was seen as too risky when they drew up the campaign plan.
    I don't know - I think I agree with @TimS - it seems clear that even many typically Tory voters are exasperated with the party and how it has governed, and I am worried about the polling day cold feet of many typically Labour voters who may be flirting with Greens (from my pov) worrying a "Vote for Greens is a Vote for Tories" and will get squeezed. I think there is a good argument being made here that Labour are so clearly going to get a majority and the Tories are in such trouble that in this election you don't have to necessarily vote tactically to kick out a Tory government - but with those numbers around how many voters want the Tories to get 0 seats, and how I'm sure some constituents with certain MPs have added desires to kick them out in a cross party manner, I do wonder if Labour could even exceed the polls. But we'll have to see!
    A vote for Green in the vast majority of seats is a wasted vote, pure and simple. So it's right that those votes are squeezed. There are exceptions – but not very many.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,410
    edited June 20

    On the assumption that the Supreme Court are trained judges who know how to interpret the law, surely the issue is the law (and the lawmakers), not the court.

    Probably something either May or Gordo wrote into the books wanting to look like the sun was shining out their arsehole. It is a plus point in favour of a reform vote in my book.
    Against that their mad economics would probably mean interest rates of 50%.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 116,165
    Serbia have threatened to pull out of Euro 2024 over chanting between fans at the match between Croatia and Albania on Wednesday.

    Fans could be heard chanting about the killing of Serbians during the 2-2 draw in the Group B match.

    The general secretary of the Football Association of Serbia, Jovan Surbatovic, has called for the strongest sanction to be taken.

    He told the Serbian state-owned broadcaster RTS: "What happened is scandalous and we will ask [European governing body] Uefa for sanctions, even if it means not continuing the competition."

    Serbia are in Group C and began the tournament with a 1-0 defeat by England on Sunday.

    Surbatovic said that he was "sure they will be punished" following Uefa's decision on Wednesday to cancel the credentials of Kosovar journalist, Arlind Sadiku.

    Sadiku made a nationalist double-handed eagle gesture towards Serbia fans during the game against England. The gesture mimics the eagle on Albania's national flag, which can inflame tensions between Serbian nationalists and ethnic Albanians, who make up the vast majority of Kosovo's population.

    "We will demand from Uefa to punish the federations of both selections," Surbatovic added.

    "We do not want to participate in that, but if Uefa does not punish them, we will think how will we proceed."

    The BBC has contacted Serbia and Uefa for further comment.

    Serbia were fined £12,250 after fans threw objects during the Englan


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cd110nzxwvko
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,813
    edited June 20
    I know PBers loves them a bit of Owen.
    Official, Jones a much sharper political operator than the whole Tory party.

    https://x.com/owenjones84/status/1803739959179849954?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q

  • Options
    Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,423
    Let's just all vote for Reform and have Nigel as our ruler. I'm getting fed up of hearing what he will do. Let's just see him do it.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,696
    I see Gove is concerned about Labour installing yes men into public offices.
    Can't think where they'd get the inspiration to do any such thing.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 19,715
    Thinking about placards, around here both the Reform ones and the Ashfield Independent ones are fark writing on white backgrounds, which recedes.

    The Labour ones are solid red backgrounds and stand out much better.

    I can't comment on the Tory ones or the LD ones as there aren't any.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,566
    How does PB feel about courtsiding?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 116,165
    edited June 20
    Greatest news for us savers as we have been persecuted since 2009.

    Interest rates stay at 5.25%

    UK interest rates have been left unchanged at 5.25% by the Bank of England.

    The Bank has held rates at 5.25% for the seventh time, in an effort to combat inflation, leading to higher mortgage repayments but also higher savings rates.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c033rlenvjet
  • Options
    FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,072

    Nunu5 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Nunu5 said:

    Bad news for oil in the UK: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxwwzmn12g9o

    Edited: so we'll just get it from Saudi Arabia instead. Obviously way better for the planet that way.

    The Supreme Court in the UK have become very activist.
    The Supreme Court judges did not rule that Surrey County Council should reject the proposal for new oil wells but that it should have considered the downstream emissions.

    This is precisely the sort of ruling that means any sort of large infrastructure project costs at least £50 Billion more than it should.
    It means we will import 100% of our oil and gas

    Another reason why the Tories deserve #zeroseats is because they didn't get rid of this Supreme Court
    100% of zero* is zero. The important thing to focus on is to stop burning oil and gas by implementing better technologies.

    *I know we have plenty of other uses for oil and gas besides combustion, but still.
    That is a really important point. Aside from the environmental damage caused by burning fossil fuels, it seems an utterly insane waste of a valuable resource that has other vital uses. If we keep it in the ground, it'll still be there for when we really need it. Those who advocate extracting and burning our reserves now risk leaving our children at the mercy of those countries with greater reserves than us. Idiots.
Sign In or Register to comment.