Broxbourne and Basildon/Billericay are the first big tests of the models
EC Broxbourne 0.3 Con YG Broxbourne 1% Lab NS Broxbourne 2.4% Lab IPSOS Broxbourne 1% Con SAVANTA Broxbourne 4.97% Lab FOCALDATA Broxbourne 2.0% Con More in Common Broxbourne 6.50% Con Survation Broxbourne 1.73% Con
Same MRPs/models
Basildon and Billericay 2.4 Lab Basildon and Billericay 2% Rfm Basildon and Billericay 0.4% Con Basildon and Billericay 5% Lab Basildon and Billericay 6.89% Lab Basildon and Billericay 8.3% Con Basildon and Billericay 8.80% Con Basildon and Billericay 1.89% Lab
Thank you, and you everyone else doing these spreadsheets.There’s going to be money made on here again isn’t there?
If a lot of us do well, a donate button for the site feels overdue, but also maybe a way to buy a notional beer for the various spreadsheet builders.
@Andy_JS did a spreadsheet for the 2016 referendum, that made many of us here a lot of money. If we should ever meet, he will leave very drunk and not having bought a single drink. 🍻
Yes he made me a lot of money that night. I’d be racing you to the bar for him.
Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.
Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.
Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.
Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.
You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.
As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.
So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?
No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.
Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.
The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.
Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.
While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?
No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.
They can care, bitch and moan all they please.
But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.
Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.
There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.
Why is there?
If its their own land, what difference is there?
You're taking the "someone's freedom to swing their fist stops where my nose begins" argument to the extreme where they are forced to tolerate being surrounded by antisocial behaviour. It's a profoundly unconservative position.
You're right, its a profoundly liberal position.
I've always said I'm more of a liberal than a conservative.
Nobody is forced to tolerate being surrounded by antisocial behaviour. If people are doing anything illegal, that should be stopped. If people don't like their neighbours doing entirely legal actions, they are the antisocial ones and can move if they please.
Nice header, but why do you/we focus on the bad polls for the Tories?
I accept that Ipsos and Survation have some pedigree, but Varian, JLP and MiC are all solid enough and members of the BPC. I appreciate that even they are not so great for the Blue team, but they do at least feed a little life into what otherwise would be the dried out corpse of the outgoing government.
The question is why are we seeing such a wide divergence (the gap between 18% and 25% is vast in statistical terms). Is it methodology, sampling, weighting, re-allocation of Don't Knows?
I pointed to a huge discrepency in the over 65 vote shares between More In Common (40% for the Conservatives) and R&W (25%).
JL Partners has 43% Conservative share among the over 65s which explains its higher Conservative VI.
I saw something on Twitter that was saying some pollsters were accounting for some of the older Tory vote dying off since 2019, and some weren’t.
Didn’t look into it too much but that could explain a lot if it differs between pollsters?
The bigger issue for the MRPs is that the census data they use to back-project their poll findings and analysis onto each constituency are often quite old.
When you look at by-election swings, the Lib Dems have mahoosively outperformed Labour (Even though Labour had some very good swings this parliament). I think the yellows could be in for a very good night indeed.
I dare not jinx it but getting my hopes up. Done that too often.
I'll be relieved if we go above 20 seats, happy if we get 25+ and delirious if we beat the SNP into 3rd place.
I worry for you when the LDs beat the Tories into 2nd.
Yes I still think this bet at 4.5 is stunning value. If tactical voting is anything like all the indications suggest it will be, the LDs should have a good shot at getting over the line.
Not a chance. Even on the MRPs which generally show worse seat numbers than UNS the Tories are generally getting comfortably over 100 seats. And there remain at least 2 or 3 percentage points of Reform left to squeeze even if the Ref vote holds up much higher than in recent local elections.
That's simply factually wrong.
The MRP average is 98 seats or just over 100 if you exclude electoral calculus. Half are over and half under 100 seats. The remainder of your statement might be true but the bit in bold is codswallop.
The ones I can see from the last few days are: Yougov (Tories on 108), Focaldata (110), Ipsos (115), Survation (72) and Savanta (52) - I'd missed Savanta but it and Survation both look like big outliers. I assume there must be others given your codswallop comment.
Electoral Calculus 75 New Statesman 96 More in Common 155
My daughter told me last night she might not vote Green because she doesn't want to wake up to a Tory/ Reform led Parliament.
I told her if she votes Labour she is voting for continuation Tory and will have a lot more to regret.
She sent me a photo of her PV 5 mins later.
She voted Green.
That's a really depressing post in so many ways. I wouldn't dream of interfering with my children's vote.
Shame on you BJO.
She wanted to vote Green but was scared of the (0.00001%) chance of Reform holding the balance of power.
She was asking advice as to how likely that was and as a neutral on the SKS fan front it was only right she was aware of the consequences of voting for the continuation Tory Red team in respect of NHS reform austerity etc.
Is it not illegal to take a photograph of a completed ballot paper?
Does a PV count? It's certainly illegal in a voting station.
Applies to PVs too:
3B The circumstances referred to in subsection (3A)(c) are where V [the voter] is about to mark, is in the process of marking, or has just marked, a ballot paper sent to V for voting by post at the election.
Nice header, but why do you/we focus on the bad polls for the Tories?
I accept that Ipsos and Survation have some pedigree, but Varian, JLP and MiC are all solid enough and members of the BPC. I appreciate that even they are not so great for the Blue team, but they do at least feed a little life into what otherwise would be the dried out corpse of the outgoing government.
The question is why are we seeing such a wide divergence (the gap between 18% and 25% is vast in statistical terms). Is it methodology, sampling, weighting, re-allocation of Don't Knows?
I pointed to a huge discrepency in the over 65 vote shares between More In Common (40% for the Conservatives) and R&W (25%).
JL Partners has 43% Conservative share among the over 65s which explains its higher Conservative VI.
I saw something on Twitter that was saying some pollsters were accounting for some of the older Tory vote dying off since 2019, and some weren’t.
Didn’t look into it too much but that could explain a lot if it differs between pollsters?
The bigger issue for the MRPs is that the census data they use to back-project their poll findings and analysis onto each constituency are often quite old.
When you look at by-election swings, the Lib Dems have mahoosively outperformed Labour (Even though Labour had some very good swings this parliament). I think the yellows could be in for a very good night indeed.
I dare not jinx it but getting my hopes up. Done that too often.
I'll be relieved if we go above 20 seats, happy if we get 25+ and delirious if we beat the SNP into 3rd place.
I worry for you when the LDs beat the Tories into 2nd.
Yes I still think this bet at 4.5 is stunning value. If tactical voting is anything like all the indications suggest it will be, the LDs should have a good shot at getting over the line.
Not a chance. Even on the MRPs which generally show worse seat numbers than UNS the Tories are generally getting comfortably over 100 seats. And there remain at least 2 or 3 percentage points of Reform left to squeeze even if the Ref vote holds up much higher than in recent local elections.
That's simply factually wrong.
The MRP average is 98 seats or just over 100 if you exclude electoral calculus. Half are over and half under 100 seats. The remainder of your statement might be true but the bit in bold is codswallop.
The ones I can see from the last few days are: Yougov (Tories on 108), Focaldata (110), Ipsos (115), Survation (72) and Savanta (52) - I'd missed Savanta but it and Survation both look like big outliers. I assume there must be others given your codswallop comment.
Electoral Calculus 75 New Statesman 96 More in Common 155
Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.
Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.
Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.
Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.
You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.
As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.
So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?
No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.
Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.
The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.
Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.
While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?
No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.
They can care, bitch and moan all they please.
But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.
Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.
There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.
Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.
Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.
Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.
Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.
You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.
As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.
So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?
No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.
Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.
The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.
Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.
While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?
No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.
They can care, bitch and moan all they please.
But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.
Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.
There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.
Why is there?
If its their own land, what difference is there?
You're taking the "someone's freedom to swing their fist stops where my nose begins" argument to the extreme where they are forced to tolerate being surrounded by antisocial behaviour. It's a profoundly unconservative position.
You're right, its a profoundly liberal position.
I've always said I'm more of a liberal than a conservative.
Nobody is forced to tolerate being surrounded by antisocial behaviour. If people are doing anything illegal, that should be stopped. If people don't like their neighbours doing entirely legal actions, they are the antisocial ones and can move if they please.
For example if your neighbour decided to turn their house into a nightclub, you'd be the antisocial one if you objected, or would you have some kind of system to regulate this?
My daughter told me last night she might not vote Green because she doesn't want to wake up to a Tory/ Reform led Parliament.
I told her if she votes Labour she is voting for continuation Tory and will have a lot more to regret.
She sent me a photo of her PV 5 mins later.
She voted Green.
That's a really depressing post in so many ways. I wouldn't dream of interfering with my children's vote.
Shame on you BJO.
She wanted to vote Green but was scared of the (0.00001%) chance of Reform holding the balance of power.
She was asking advice as to how likely that was and as a neutral on the SKS fan front it was only right she was aware of the consequences of voting for the continuation Tory Red team in respect of NHS reform austerity etc.
You and Casino need to have a chat with each other: Your 'Tory Red team' = Casino's Socialists.
One of you at least will be wrong - probably both of you.
I wonder what first attracted this chap to Nigel Farage?
Reform candidate Leslie Lilley said he would ‘slaughter migrants’
The 70-year-old conspiracy theorist who is likely to reap 20 per cent of the vote in Southend East & Rochford is Facebook friends with the fascist leader Gary Raikes
A Reform candidate said he would “slaughter” migrants arriving on small boats and “have their family taken out”.
Leslie Lilley, who is set to win almost 20 per cent of the vote in the Labour battleground seat of Southend East & Rochford, made the threats on the official Facebook account he uses to run his local campaign.
In a post in June 2020, Lilley reacted to the news of a small boat arriving in Dover saying: “I hope I’m near one of these scumbags one day I won’t run away I’ll slaughter them then have their family taken out.”
The same month, Lilley, now 70, railed against “more scum entering the UK”, adding “I hope your family get Robbed, Beaten or attacked”.
He also suggested Border Force vessels should have razor wire to tear small boats carrying migrants across the Channel, and commented “gas” along with several laughing emojis under a video of Muslims praying.
Lilley, who has also argued that the pandemic was a plan to “depopulate the world” and was “mass murder by government”, is one of the 41 Reform UK candidates who are “friends” on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the fascist leader.
Nice header, but why do you/we focus on the bad polls for the Tories?
I accept that Ipsos and Survation have some pedigree, but Varian, JLP and MiC are all solid enough and members of the BPC. I appreciate that even they are not so great for the Blue team, but they do at least feed a little life into what otherwise would be the dried out corpse of the outgoing government.
The question is why are we seeing such a wide divergence (the gap between 18% and 25% is vast in statistical terms). Is it methodology, sampling, weighting, re-allocation of Don't Knows?
I pointed to a huge discrepency in the over 65 vote shares between More In Common (40% for the Conservatives) and R&W (25%).
JL Partners has 43% Conservative share among the over 65s which explains its higher Conservative VI.
I saw something on Twitter that was saying some pollsters were accounting for some of the older Tory vote dying off since 2019, and some weren’t.
Didn’t look into it too much but that could explain a lot if it differs between pollsters?
The bigger issue for the MRPs is that the census data they use to back-project their poll findings and analysis onto each constituency are often quite old.
When you look at by-election swings, the Lib Dems have mahoosively outperformed Labour (Even though Labour had some very good swings this parliament). I think the yellows could be in for a very good night indeed.
I dare not jinx it but getting my hopes up. Done that too often.
I'll be relieved if we go above 20 seats, happy if we get 25+ and delirious if we beat the SNP into 3rd place.
I worry for you when the LDs beat the Tories into 2nd.
Yes I still think this bet at 4.5 is stunning value. If tactical voting is anything like all the indications suggest it will be, the LDs should have a good shot at getting over the line.
Not a chance. Even on the MRPs which generally show worse seat numbers than UNS the Tories are generally getting comfortably over 100 seats. And there remain at least 2 or 3 percentage points of Reform left to squeeze even if the Ref vote holds up much higher than in recent local elections.
That's simply factually wrong.
The MRP average is 98 seats or just over 100 if you exclude electoral calculus. Half are over and half under 100 seats. The remainder of your statement might be true but the bit in bold is codswallop.
The ones I can see from the last few days are: Yougov (Tories on 108), Focaldata (110), Ipsos (115), Survation (72) and Savanta (52) - I'd missed Savanta but it and Survation both look like big outliers. I assume there must be others given your codswallop comment.
Electoral Calculus 75 New Statesman 96 More in Common 155
I don't think either Electoral Calculus or New Statesman are MRPs. They are models based on national polling.
My daughter told me last night she might not vote Green because she doesn't want to wake up to a Tory/ Reform led Parliament.
I told her if she votes Labour she is voting for continuation Tory and will have a lot more to regret.
She sent me a photo of her PV 5 mins later.
She voted Green.
That's a really depressing post in so many ways. I wouldn't dream of interfering with my children's vote.
Shame on you BJO.
She wanted to vote Green but was scared of the (0.00001%) chance of Reform holding the balance of power.
She was asking advice as to how likely that was and as a neutral on the SKS fan front it was only right she was aware of the consequences of voting for the continuation Tory Red team in respect of NHS reform austerity etc.
But you haven't told her the truth, you have given her your interpretation as fact. How will you explain away Deputy Prime Minister Farage?
Very old school Labour, very old school controlling behaviour/ misogyny.
I think were these things ever taken seriously BJO leaning on his daughter to vote Green and she then sending him a photo of her completed postal ballot would be clear evidence of lawbreaking.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.
Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.
Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.
Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.
You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.
As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.
So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?
No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.
Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.
The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.
Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.
While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?
No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.
They can care, bitch and moan all they please.
But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.
Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.
There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.
Why is there?
If its their own land, what difference is there?
Do you oppose restrictions on noise pollution?
I think there should be legal restriction on noise and other pollution in land zoned for residential housing, and so long as whatever you're planning doesn't violate those noise or any other restrictions it should be perfectly legal.
If it does, there ought to be consequences, but you don't need NIMBYs or planning to deal with that.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.
🚨 Manchester United considering selling naming rights to Old Trafford as they seek to drive up revenues as part of Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s plans to refurbish Old Trafford or build a new stadium. Ticket price increases also under consideration.
Nice header, but why do you/we focus on the bad polls for the Tories?
I accept that Ipsos and Survation have some pedigree, but Varian, JLP and MiC are all solid enough and members of the BPC. I appreciate that even they are not so great for the Blue team, but they do at least feed a little life into what otherwise would be the dried out corpse of the outgoing government.
The question is why are we seeing such a wide divergence (the gap between 18% and 25% is vast in statistical terms). Is it methodology, sampling, weighting, re-allocation of Don't Knows?
I pointed to a huge discrepency in the over 65 vote shares between More In Common (40% for the Conservatives) and R&W (25%).
JL Partners has 43% Conservative share among the over 65s which explains its higher Conservative VI.
I saw something on Twitter that was saying some pollsters were accounting for some of the older Tory vote dying off since 2019, and some weren’t.
Didn’t look into it too much but that could explain a lot if it differs between pollsters?
The bigger issue for the MRPs is that the census data they use to back-project their poll findings and analysis onto each constituency are often quite old.
When you look at by-election swings, the Lib Dems have mahoosively outperformed Labour (Even though Labour had some very good swings this parliament). I think the yellows could be in for a very good night indeed.
I dare not jinx it but getting my hopes up. Done that too often.
I'll be relieved if we go above 20 seats, happy if we get 25+ and delirious if we beat the SNP into 3rd place.
I worry for you when the LDs beat the Tories into 2nd.
Yes I still think this bet at 4.5 is stunning value. If tactical voting is anything like all the indications suggest it will be, the LDs should have a good shot at getting over the line.
Not a chance. Even on the MRPs which generally show worse seat numbers than UNS the Tories are generally getting comfortably over 100 seats. And there remain at least 2 or 3 percentage points of Reform left to squeeze even if the Ref vote holds up much higher than in recent local elections.
That's simply factually wrong.
The MRP average is 98 seats or just over 100 if you exclude electoral calculus. Half are over and half under 100 seats. The remainder of your statement might be true but the bit in bold is codswallop.
The ones I can see from the last few days are: Yougov (Tories on 108), Focaldata (110), Ipsos (115), Survation (72) and Savanta (52) - I'd missed Savanta but it and Survation both look like big outliers. I assume there must be others given your codswallop comment.
Electoral Calculus 75 New Statesman 96 More in Common 155
I don't think either Electoral Calculus or New Statesman are MRPs, nor is the Economist forecast. They are models based on national polling.
Electoral Calculus does work with other pollsters to produce MRPs, as per https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_mrpinfo_20240604.html. But what's commonly referred to on here as "Baxtering" some poll numbers is (obviously) based on headline national figures.
The New Statesman is Ben Walker's refinement of EC's Strong Transition Model.
(b)otherwise obtain or attempt to obtain in a polling station information as to the candidate for whom a voter in that station is about to vote or has voted;
Much that I think @bigjohnowls has broken parts of paragraph 3 I don't think its 3B, 3A on the other hand....
Anyway, on thread: the value in those spreads is surely buying Labour. They're not going to do much worse than that and they could do considerably better. I don't think it unreasonable that they'll get 500; I do think it implausible that they'll get as low as 350. A definite buy. Sell Tories also strikes me as good value; while they could go as low as 50, they're surely not going to go as high as 200.
While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.
It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.
"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.
Tennant said in his acceptance speech:
"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”
In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:
"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”
"calling publicly for my existence to end".
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.
It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.
"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.
Tennant said in his acceptance speech:
"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”
In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:
"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”
"calling publicly for my existence to end".
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
Kemi is very entitled. Does Tenant realise how important she is?
While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.
It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.
"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.
Tennant said in his acceptance speech:
"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”
In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:
"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”
"calling publicly for my existence to end".
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
I'm sure the whole Tory party culture war is aimed at people who don't research things. Nor read or think (but that's by the by).
Anyway, on thread: the value in those spreads is surely buying Labour. They're not going to do much worse than that and they could do considerably better. I don't think it unreasonable that they'll get 500; I do think it implausible that they'll get as low as 350. A definite buy. Sell Tories also strikes me as good value; while they could go as low as 50, they're surely not going to go as high as 200.
Though for both of those, using the likely limits you suggest the potential losses are about the same as the potential gains. Which is as it should be, I guess.
Then it all comes down to will Labour do better than expected, or will the Conservatives?
My daughter told me last night she might not vote Green because she doesn't want to wake up to a Tory/ Reform led Parliament.
I told her if she votes Labour she is voting for continuation Tory and will have a lot more to regret.
She sent me a photo of her PV 5 mins later.
She voted Green.
That's a really depressing post in so many ways. I wouldn't dream of interfering with my children's vote.
Shame on you BJO.
She wanted to vote Green but was scared of the (0.00001%) chance of Reform holding the balance of power.
She was asking advice as to how likely that was and as a neutral on the SKS fan front it was only right she was aware of the consequences of voting for the continuation Tory Red team in respect of NHS reform austerity etc.
But you haven't told her the truth, you have given her your interpretation as fact. How will you explain away Deputy Prime Minister Farage?
Very old school Labour, very old school controlling behaviour/ misogyny.
🚨 Manchester United considering selling naming rights to Old Trafford as they seek to drive up revenues as part of Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s plans to refurbish Old Trafford or build a new stadium. Ticket price increases also under consideration.
Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.
Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.
Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.
Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.
You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.
As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.
So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?
No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.
Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.
The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.
Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.
While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?
No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.
They can care, bitch and moan all they please.
But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.
Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.
There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.
Why is there?
If its their own land, what difference is there?
Do you oppose restrictions on noise pollution?
I think there should be legal restriction on noise and other pollution in land zoned for residential housing, and so long as whatever you're planning doesn't violate those noise or any other restrictions it should be perfectly legal.
If it does, there ought to be consequences, but you don't need NIMBYs or planning to deal with that.
There is a difference between letting anything happen and then acting if laws are broken (which appears to be your approach); and a planning system that stops something that is liable to break laws before it happens. I think it’s generally sensible to review plans before they happen, rather than to wait for problems to arise.
The WeThink MRP has some odd results. Not sure I buy that Reform are going to take Newark or one of the IOW seats as well as others but Farage fails by 14% points and Tice loses as does 30p Lee. I mean it would be hilarious but I just don’t buy it.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.
Its not about supporting Putin though is it. Its whether you support the policy towards the ukraine war which at present seems to be providing endless weapons so more people can be slaughtered or whether you give peace a chance.
My daughter told me last night she might not vote Green because she doesn't want to wake up to a Tory/ Reform led Parliament.
I told her if she votes Labour she is voting for continuation Tory and will have a lot more to regret.
She sent me a photo of her PV 5 mins later.
She voted Green.
That's a really depressing post in so many ways. I wouldn't dream of interfering with my children's vote.
Shame on you BJO.
She wanted to vote Green but was scared of the (0.00001%) chance of Reform holding the balance of power.
She was asking advice as to how likely that was and as a neutral on the SKS fan front it was only right she was aware of the consequences of voting for the continuation Tory Red team in respect of NHS reform austerity etc.
But you haven't told her the truth, you have given her your interpretation as fact. How will you explain away Deputy Prime Minister Farage?
Very old school Labour, very old school controlling behaviour/ misogyny.
Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.
Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.
Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.
Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.
You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.
As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.
So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?
No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.
Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.
The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.
Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.
While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?
No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.
They can care, bitch and moan all they please.
But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.
Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.
There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.
Why is there?
If its their own land, what difference is there?
Do you oppose restrictions on noise pollution?
I think there should be legal restriction on noise and other pollution in land zoned for residential housing, and so long as whatever you're planning doesn't violate those noise or any other restrictions it should be perfectly legal.
If it does, there ought to be consequences, but you don't need NIMBYs or planning to deal with that.
It wasn't a planning question, more to do with finding out what limits you'd place on other people's behaviour.
You don't think it's okay for neighbours to cause a nuisance by creating lots of noise.
You do think it's okay for neighbours to deprive their neighbours of natural sunlight by building tall buildings.
I don't think most people would draw such a strong distinction between these two things as you do. You're definitely interesting to study.
(b)otherwise obtain or attempt to obtain in a polling station information as to the candidate for whom a voter in that station is about to vote or has voted;
Much that I think @bigjohnowls has broken parts of paragraph 3 I don't think its 3B, 3A on the other hand....
No. 3B not 3 (b) (3B)The circumstances referred to in subsection (3A)(c) are where V is about to mark, is in the process of marking, or has just marked, a ballot paper sent to V for voting by post at the election.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.
Its not about supporting Putin though is it. Its whether you support the policy towards the ukraine war which at present seems to be providing endless weapons so more people can be slaughtered or whether you give peace a chance.
Broxbourne and Basildon/Billericay are the first big tests of the models
EC Broxbourne 0.3 Con YG Broxbourne 1% Lab NS Broxbourne 2.4% Lab IPSOS Broxbourne 1% Con SAVANTA Broxbourne 4.97% Lab FOCALDATA Broxbourne 2.0% Con More in Common Broxbourne 6.50% Con Survation Broxbourne 1.73% Con
Same MRPs/models
Basildon and Billericay 2.4 Lab Basildon and Billericay 2% Rfm Basildon and Billericay 0.4% Con Basildon and Billericay 5% Lab Basildon and Billericay 6.89% Lab Basildon and Billericay 8.3% Con Basildon and Billericay 8.80% Con Basildon and Billericay 1.89% Lab
Thank you, and you everyone else doing these spreadsheets.There’s going to be money made on here again isn’t there?
If a lot of us do well, a donate button for the site feels overdue, but also maybe a way to buy a notional beer for the various spreadsheet builders.
@Andy_JS did a spreadsheet for the 2016 referendum, that made many of us here a lot of money. If we should ever meet, he will leave very drunk and not having bought a single drink. 🍻
Oddly enough I didn't make much money out of it myself because I was too busy scrolling through results, etc.
After someone on here encouraged me to do so, I'm doing another spreadsheet this year which will hopefully predict what the result will be in each constituency assuming the overall result is X, and then we can compare the actual result to that.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.
Fair enough. I must admit, I've been rather taken aback by the Putin stuff. I knew Nigel was not entirely trustworthy on Ukraine - but I thought he'd at least try to come across as such. And I'm quite staggered there are quite so many out and out Putinistas among Reform candidates. I'm slightly surprised there are that many Putinistas in the country.
I think Sandpit's right on Nigel - he's spent too much time in America and is looking through the wrong Overton window - but I'm surprised at the rest of them. Not that there are cranks in Reform (or indeed any other party) - but that their crankery is so consistent. I'd be interested to know if the Greens are the same.
I wonder what first attracted this chap to Nigel Farage?
Reform candidate Leslie Lilley said he would ‘slaughter migrants’
The 70-year-old conspiracy theorist who is likely to reap 20 per cent of the vote in Southend East & Rochford is Facebook friends with the fascist leader Gary Raikes
A Reform candidate said he would “slaughter” migrants arriving on small boats and “have their family taken out”.
Leslie Lilley, who is set to win almost 20 per cent of the vote in the Labour battleground seat of Southend East & Rochford, made the threats on the official Facebook account he uses to run his local campaign.
In a post in June 2020, Lilley reacted to the news of a small boat arriving in Dover saying: “I hope I’m near one of these scumbags one day I won’t run away I’ll slaughter them then have their family taken out.”
The same month, Lilley, now 70, railed against “more scum entering the UK”, adding “I hope your family get Robbed, Beaten or attacked”.
He also suggested Border Force vessels should have razor wire to tear small boats carrying migrants across the Channel, and commented “gas” along with several laughing emojis under a video of Muslims praying.
Lilley, who has also argued that the pandemic was a plan to “depopulate the world” and was “mass murder by government”, is one of the 41 Reform UK candidates who are “friends” on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the fascist leader.
I seriously think I’m going to set up a UK political vetting company.
I am really worried about this Country, worried about the amount of people who are willing to vote for Farage's bunch of crackpots and racists, even after hearing views like this, and particularly worried about 2029, when Farage and his like could be very near the levers of power, I really hope the Tory party gets it act in gear, and as Big G said, become a one nation conservative party again, but I fear the worst
The only way that the like of Farage (and a whole lot worse) get defeated, is for the more mainsteam parties to actually listen to what their supporters are saying, and materially make their life better. Many of those voting for Farage feel they have no mainstream voice supporting them.
I’m reminded of the famous Michael Moore video from 2016, where he explains to a coastal liberal audience why people in ‘left-behind’ communities are voting for Trump in huge numbers. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vMm5HfxNXY4
This is so so so important to stress.
I read some posts on here with slight bemusement. It is as if Brexit never happened, as if those voters went away somewhere or their sense of frustration and disillusionment was magically fixed by the Tories setting themselves up for defeat.
This isn’t going away. And I will continue to bang the drum on here and elsewhere. I don’t want a populist right government. I want sensible, competent government that listens to its people, is willing to have the difficult conversations around things the establishment classes would rather we didn’t talk about, and embraces the need for (small r) reform of the way our society works.
If these voters and communities continue to be ignored then we will get chancers like Farage in power within about a decade.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Yes, support for Reform is driven primarily by anger, leavened with a strong measure of nostalgia.
The WeThink MRP has some odd results. Not sure I buy that Reform are going to take Newark or one of the IOW seats as well as others but Farage fails by 14% points and Tice loses as does 30p Lee. I mean it would be hilarious but I just don’t buy it.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.
Fair enough. I must admit, I've been rather taken aback by the Putin stuff. I knew Nigel was not entirely trustworthy on Ukraine - but I thought he'd at least try to come across as such. And I'm quite staggered there are quite so many out and out Putinistas among Reform candidates. I'm slightly surprised there are that many Putinistas in the country.
I think Sandpit's right on Nigel - he's spent too much time in America and is looking through the wrong Overton window - but I'm surprised at the rest of them. Not that there are cranks in Reform (or indeed any other party) - but that their crankery is so consistent. I'd be interested to know if the Greens are the same.
I wonder what first attracted this chap to Nigel Farage?
Reform candidate Leslie Lilley said he would ‘slaughter migrants’
The 70-year-old conspiracy theorist who is likely to reap 20 per cent of the vote in Southend East & Rochford is Facebook friends with the fascist leader Gary Raikes
A Reform candidate said he would “slaughter” migrants arriving on small boats and “have their family taken out”.
Leslie Lilley, who is set to win almost 20 per cent of the vote in the Labour battleground seat of Southend East & Rochford, made the threats on the official Facebook account he uses to run his local campaign.
In a post in June 2020, Lilley reacted to the news of a small boat arriving in Dover saying: “I hope I’m near one of these scumbags one day I won’t run away I’ll slaughter them then have their family taken out.”
The same month, Lilley, now 70, railed against “more scum entering the UK”, adding “I hope your family get Robbed, Beaten or attacked”.
He also suggested Border Force vessels should have razor wire to tear small boats carrying migrants across the Channel, and commented “gas” along with several laughing emojis under a video of Muslims praying.
Lilley, who has also argued that the pandemic was a plan to “depopulate the world” and was “mass murder by government”, is one of the 41 Reform UK candidates who are “friends” on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the fascist leader.
I seriously think I’m going to set up a UK political vetting company.
I am really worried about this Country, worried about the amount of people who are willing to vote for Farage's bunch of crackpots and racists, even after hearing views like this, and particularly worried about 2029, when Farage and his like could be very near the levers of power, I really hope the Tory party gets it act in gear, and as Big G said, become a one nation conservative party again, but I fear the worst
The only way that the like of Farage (and a whole lot worse) get defeated, is for the more mainsteam parties to actually listen to what their supporters are saying, and materially make their life better. Many of those voting for Farage feel they have no mainstream voice supporting them.
I’m reminded of the famous Michael Moore video from 2016, where he explains to a coastal liberal audience why people in ‘left-behind’ communities are voting for Trump in huge numbers. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vMm5HfxNXY4
This is so so so important to stress.
I read some posts on here with slight bemusement. It is as if Brexit never happened, as if those voters went away somewhere or their sense of frustration and disillusionment was magically fixed by the Tories setting themselves up for defeat.
This isn’t going away. And I will continue to bang the drum on here and elsewhere. I don’t want a populist right government. I want sensible, competent government that listens to its people, is willing to have the difficult conversations around things the establishment classes would rather we didn’t talk about, and embraces the need for (small r) reform of the way our society works.
If these voters and communities continue to be ignored then we will get chancers like Farage in power within about a decade.
Im going to call it. Today is the happiest day of the year. Good weather England still in major football tournament Anticipation of Tory rout next week
The weather is due to break later this week and England are then due to make their usual tame exit.
Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.
Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.
Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.
Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.
You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.
As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.
So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?
No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.
Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.
The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.
Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.
While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?
No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.
They can care, bitch and moan all they please.
But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.
Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.
There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.
Why is there?
If its their own land, what difference is there?
Do you oppose restrictions on noise pollution?
I think there should be legal restriction on noise and other pollution in land zoned for residential housing, and so long as whatever you're planning doesn't violate those noise or any other restrictions it should be perfectly legal.
If it does, there ought to be consequences, but you don't need NIMBYs or planning to deal with that.
A zoning system is completely at odds with letting people do what they want with their land.
'This doesn't mean MRP is worthless! It has already taught us something very valuable about the election – that the Conservatives are likely to substantially underperform uniform swing. If we were relying on national polling alone, our view might be very different.’
In an election when what motivates a lot of us is booting out the tories (apologies to those who find vengeance distasteful) this tactical and regional voting is likely to pep up the excitement on the night. There could be, well there will be, some remarkable individual seat results.
I wonder what first attracted this chap to Nigel Farage?
Reform candidate Leslie Lilley said he would ‘slaughter migrants’
The 70-year-old conspiracy theorist who is likely to reap 20 per cent of the vote in Southend East & Rochford is Facebook friends with the fascist leader Gary Raikes
A Reform candidate said he would “slaughter” migrants arriving on small boats and “have their family taken out”.
Leslie Lilley, who is set to win almost 20 per cent of the vote in the Labour battleground seat of Southend East & Rochford, made the threats on the official Facebook account he uses to run his local campaign.
In a post in June 2020, Lilley reacted to the news of a small boat arriving in Dover saying: “I hope I’m near one of these scumbags one day I won’t run away I’ll slaughter them then have their family taken out.”
The same month, Lilley, now 70, railed against “more scum entering the UK”, adding “I hope your family get Robbed, Beaten or attacked”.
He also suggested Border Force vessels should have razor wire to tear small boats carrying migrants across the Channel, and commented “gas” along with several laughing emojis under a video of Muslims praying.
Lilley, who has also argued that the pandemic was a plan to “depopulate the world” and was “mass murder by government”, is one of the 41 Reform UK candidates who are “friends” on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the fascist leader.
I seriously think I’m going to set up a UK political vetting company.
I am really worried about this Country, worried about the amount of people who are willing to vote for Farage's bunch of crackpots and racists, even after hearing views like this, and particularly worried about 2029, when Farage and his like could be very near the levers of power, I really hope the Tory party gets it act in gear, and as Big G said, become a one nation conservative party again, but I fear the worst
The only way that the like of Farage (and a whole lot worse) get defeated, is for the more mainsteam parties to actually listen to what their supporters are saying, and materially make their life better. Many of those voting for Farage feel they have no mainstream voice supporting them.
I’m reminded of the famous Michael Moore video from 2016, where he explains to a coastal liberal audience why people in ‘left-behind’ communities are voting for Trump in huge numbers. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vMm5HfxNXY4
This is so so so important to stress.
I read some posts on here with slight bemusement. It is as if Brexit never happened, as if those voters went away somewhere or their sense of frustration and disillusionment was magically fixed by the Tories setting themselves up for defeat.
This isn’t going away. And I will continue to bang the drum on here and elsewhere. I don’t want a populist right government. I want sensible, competent government that listens to its people, is willing to have the difficult conversations around things the establishment classes would rather we didn’t talk about, and embraces the need for (small r) reform of the way our society works.
If these voters and communities continue to be ignored then we will get chancers like Farage in power within about a decade.
People interpret that instruction to listen to left behind communities and make their lives better in two different ways, and I think there's an important distinction to make.
Making their lives better: yes, absolutely, and because neither the populist right nor the traditional free market liberals and their left of centre counterparts have known how to do that, the despondency has remained.
Echoing their rhetoric with more rhetoric or with policies that might superficially appeal to them but are economically damaging to their interests: no, that's exactly what the Tories have done and it makes things worse.
Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.
This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.
Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.
This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.
While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.
It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.
"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.
Tennant said in his acceptance speech:
"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”
In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:
"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”
"calling publicly for my existence to end".
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
I'm sure the whole Tory party culture war is aimed at people who don't research things. Nor read or think (but that's by the by).
Even so, portraying the other side as "bigots and bullies" is pretty bold, considering the role that stirring up hatred against minorities has been playing in the Tory self-preservation strategy.
It really would be nice to see as much as possible of the Tory party wiped off the sole of the national shoe next week.
Im going to call it. Today is the happiest day of the year. Good weather England still in major football tournament Anticipation of Tory rout next week
The weather is due to break later this week and England are then due to make their usual tame exit.
And next week the Tories will break and make a rather less tame exit.
While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.
It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.
"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.
Tennant said in his acceptance speech:
"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”
In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:
"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”
"calling publicly for my existence to end".
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
>everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else
See the bit in bold. That's the point which this very male-dominated forum keeps on missing. Men who go into women's changing rooms and act as voyeurs (voyeurism is a crime, btw) making women feel uncomfortable and distressed - see the case of the nurses in Darlington - are not living their lives without hurting others.
They want to live their lives as they want regardless of whether or not they hurt others. In some cases, hurting women seems to be the aim. Why else would young masked men gather to shout abuse at women or hold up placards threatening violence against them.
That's the point which is missed and which, when raised on here or elsewhere, gets abuse or contemptuous dismissal, such as being told to shut up.
The WeThink MRP has some odd results. Not sure I buy that Reform are going to take Newark or one of the IOW seats as well as others but Farage fails by 14% points and Tice loses as does 30p Lee. I mean it would be hilarious but I just don’t buy it.
Yes. MRPs are bad at hyper local circumstances.
Possibly. I’m just concerned that we are a reasonable poll error/late swing away from a result that is miles away from the current consensus of the Tories being all but obliterated. Imagine the soul searching if what we get is similar in seats if not vote share to 2005
🚨 Manchester United considering selling naming rights to Old Trafford as they seek to drive up revenues as part of Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s plans to refurbish Old Trafford or build a new stadium. Ticket price increases also under consideration.
While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.
It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.
"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.
Tennant said in his acceptance speech:
"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”
In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:
"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”
"calling publicly for my existence to end".
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
Kemi is very entitled. Does Tenant realise how important she is?
Both are entitled, both are using the modern social media approach to language to hype things up. Both will greatly enjoy the attention.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.
Fair enough. I must admit, I've been rather taken aback by the Putin stuff. I knew Nigel was not entirely trustworthy on Ukraine - but I thought he'd at least try to come across as such. And I'm quite staggered there are quite so many out and out Putinistas among Reform candidates. I'm slightly surprised there are that many Putinistas in the country.
I think Sandpit's right on Nigel - he's spent too much time in America and is looking through the wrong Overton window - but I'm surprised at the rest of them. Not that there are cranks in Reform (or indeed any other party) - but that their crankery is so consistent. I'd be interested to know if the Greens are the same.
I am amazed that anybody could be fooled by Farage, but I guess Brexit should have taught me my lesson.
I always knew that Boris, Truss and Raaaaaaab were vacuous idiots (as I repeatedly said on here for years), but to me it has always been obvious that Farage was primarily interested in promoting himself (like Trump). His face on Brexit night when he realised that he had killed his own Euro-gravy train was the only heart warming moment of the evening.
Starmer does not worry me in the same way that the Tory chancers and wide-boys did. I think he will do his best for the country, but I do worry that he is more of a manager than a leader. I hope he has the vision and drive necessary to improve things.
The WeThink MRP has some odd results. Not sure I buy that Reform are going to take Newark or one of the IOW seats as well as others but Farage fails by 14% points and Tice loses as does 30p Lee. I mean it would be hilarious but I just don’t buy it.
Yes. MRPs are bad at hyper local circumstances.
Possibly. I’m just concerned that we are a reasonable poll error/late swing away from a result that is miles away from the current consensus of the Tories being all but obliterated. Imagine the soul searching if what we get is similar in seats if not vote share to 2005
Im going to call it. Today is the happiest day of the year. Good weather England still in major football tournament Anticipation of Tory rout next week
The weather is due to break later this week and England are then due to make their usual tame exit.
No sign of a serious break in the weather here - cooler from tomorrow (28°C here today) but still warm and sunny.
The Conservatives OTOH are facing a serious breakdown it seems.
Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.
This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.
Oh no - here comes North Korea with all its might and resources! Run for the hills!
They've a militarised society, a massive army and lots of ballistic missiles. I think you'd be foolish to imagine this won't make a difference. Plus what has Russia promised NK?
While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.
It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.
"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.
Tennant said in his acceptance speech:
"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”
In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:
"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”
"calling publicly for my existence to end".
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
>everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else
See the bit in bold. That's the point which this very male-dominated forum keeps on missing. Men who go into women's changing rooms and act as voyeurs (voyeurism is a crime, btw) making women feel uncomfortable and distressed - see the case of the nurses in Darlington - are not living their lives without hurting others.
They want to live their lives as they want regardless of whether or not they hurt others. In some cases, hurting women seems to be the aim. Why else would young masked men gather to shout abuse at women or hold up placards threatening violence against them.
That's the point which is missed and which, when raised on here or elsewhere, gets abuse or contemptuous dismissal, such as being told to shut up.
I take it you are new around here - there are an awful lot of people who post here who agree with the Darlington Nurses that they should have a protected space.
At the 2019 election, the Conservatives were completely dominant in three of these five constituency groups – ‘The Shires’, ‘Comfortable and Commuting’ and ‘Marginal and Mixed’, giving them a clear majority across England and Wales.
Yet, our projections for 2024 show that the Tories are collapsing in their own rural and small town heartlands. In ‘The Shires’, where in 2019 the party held 114 of 116 seats, we estimate in Tory-held seats an average Tory to Labour swing of +21, leaving the party holding on to just 25 seats.
These seats are typically middle class, overwhelmingly white with older populations and many homeowners. Many are places where the Conservatives have long held power, even throughout the Blair years when Labour extended their reach into the constituencies of Middle England.
In Hexham, Northumberland, Labour are likely to win for the first time, after 100 years of Conservative dominance. In South West Norfolk, Labour are predicted to unseat former Prime Minister, Liz Truss, overturning a majority of over 26,000.
Some of the most remarkable stories on election night could come from Thirsk and Malton, Grantham and Bourne, Bexhill and Battle and Skipton and Ripon. The list could go on.
The WeThink MRP has some odd results. Not sure I buy that Reform are going to take Newark or one of the IOW seats as well as others but Farage fails by 14% points and Tice loses as does 30p Lee. I mean it would be hilarious but I just don’t buy it.
Yes. MRPs are bad at hyper local circumstances.
Possibly. I’m just concerned that we are a reasonable poll error/late swing away from a result that is miles away from the current consensus of the Tories being all but obliterated. Imagine the soul searching if what we get is similar in seats if not vote share to 2005
I just don’t see what is going to happen in the next few days to make a massive chunk of the electorate go “Actually, you know what, the Tories deserve another shot”
Especially given a lot of people have already voted…
Sorry if this is a stupid question, but are the headline figures published by the polling companies intended to be a snapshot of current opinion or a prediction of the actual election result? That is, do they attempt to take into account shy Tory/Reform/whatever voters and model which way the don't knows will go, etc, on election day, or do they simply attempt to take a representative sample of current voting intentions?
Re planning. Scrap both the 1948 act and the 1925 act, so restoring Copyhold
Save a fortune and no one gets to build anything without the Lord of the Manors say so and if you sell hour house, the Lord of the Manor gets a veto over who buys it, preventing undesirable sorts moving into the area.
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.
Fair enough. I must admit, I've been rather taken aback by the Putin stuff. I knew Nigel was not entirely trustworthy on Ukraine - but I thought he'd at least try to come across as such. And I'm quite staggered there are quite so many out and out Putinistas among Reform candidates. I'm slightly surprised there are that many Putinistas in the country.
I think Sandpit's right on Nigel - he's spent too much time in America and is looking through the wrong Overton window - but I'm surprised at the rest of them. Not that there are cranks in Reform (or indeed any other party) - but that their crankery is so consistent. I'd be interested to know if the Greens are the same.
I am amazed that anybody could be fooled by Farage, but I guess Brexit should have taught me my lesson.
I always knew that Boris, Truss and Raaaaaaab were vacuous idiots (as I repeatedly said on here for years), but to me it has always been obvious that Farage was primarily interested in promoting himself (like Trump). His face on Brexit night when he realised that he had killed his own Euro-gravy train was the only heart warming moment of the evening.
Starmer does not worry me in the same way that the Tory chancers and wide-boys did. I think he will do his best for the country, but I do worry that he is more of a manager than a leader. I hope he has the vision and drive necessary to improve things.
I always prefer a manager to a leader. Back in my day Gary Glitter was the self-styled "leader".
Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.
This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.
While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.
It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.
"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.
Tennant said in his acceptance speech:
"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”
In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:
"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”
"calling publicly for my existence to end".
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
>everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else
See the bit in bold. That's the point which this very male-dominated forum keeps on missing. Men who go into women's changing rooms and act as voyeurs (voyeurism is a crime, btw) making women feel uncomfortable and distressed - see the case of the nurses in Darlington - are not living their lives without hurting others.
They want to live their lives as they want regardless of whether or not they hurt others. In some cases, hurting women seems to be the aim. Why else would young masked men gather to shout abuse at women or hold up placards threatening violence against them.
That's the point which is missed and which, when raised on here or elsewhere, gets abuse or contemptuous dismissal, such as being told to shut up.
That's exactly the problem with this sort of rhetoric. It is tantamount to saying that trans women who are allowed to use women's changing rooms or loos are criminals.
It's the same as saying Muslims are terrorists, or Romanians are pickpockets, or gay men are paedophiles.
It's othering, pure and simple. And if you look at polling of women on this subject it gives the lie to the idea this is a battle between the sexes.
A famous employment tribunal case established that it is quite legal to be rude to scousers on the grounds that regional accents and identities are not protected characteristics.
At the 2019 election, the Conservatives were completely dominant in three of these five constituency groups – ‘The Shires’, ‘Comfortable and Commuting’ and ‘Marginal and Mixed’, giving them a clear majority across England and Wales.
Yet, our projections for 2024 show that the Tories are collapsing in their own rural and small town heartlands. In ‘The Shires’, where in 2019 the party held 114 of 116 seats, we estimate in Tory-held seats an average Tory to Labour swing of +21, leaving the party holding on to just 25 seats.
These seats are typically middle class, overwhelmingly white with older populations and many homeowners. Many are places where the Conservatives have long held power, even throughout the Blair years when Labour extended their reach into the constituencies of Middle England.
In Hexham, Northumberland, Labour are likely to win for the first time, after 100 years of Conservative dominance. In South West Norfolk, Labour are predicted to unseat former Prime Minister, Liz Truss, overturning a majority of over 26,000.
Some of the most remarkable stories on election night could come from Thirsk and Malton, Grantham and Bourne, Bexhill and Battle and Skipton and Ripon. The list could go on.
Am I the only one who hates these trite constituency groupings? ‘Comfortable and Commuting’ and ‘Marginal and Mixed’ FFS.
Presume the authors are in one of the Smug and Patronising seats.
Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.
This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.
Oh no - here comes North Korea with all its might and resources! Run for the hills!
Putin's thinking is presumably that North Korea has more bullet magnets than Ukraine has bullets.
I was wondering what does the North Korean harvest look like. Does sending 500,000 soldiers to Russia so Russia feeds them have an impact on food availability.
At the 2019 election, the Conservatives were completely dominant in three of these five constituency groups – ‘The Shires’, ‘Comfortable and Commuting’ and ‘Marginal and Mixed’, giving them a clear majority across England and Wales.
Yet, our projections for 2024 show that the Tories are collapsing in their own rural and small town heartlands. In ‘The Shires’, where in 2019 the party held 114 of 116 seats, we estimate in Tory-held seats an average Tory to Labour swing of +21, leaving the party holding on to just 25 seats.
These seats are typically middle class, overwhelmingly white with older populations and many homeowners. Many are places where the Conservatives have long held power, even throughout the Blair years when Labour extended their reach into the constituencies of Middle England.
In Hexham, Northumberland, Labour are likely to win for the first time, after 100 years of Conservative dominance. In South West Norfolk, Labour are predicted to unseat former Prime Minister, Liz Truss, overturning a majority of over 26,000.
Some of the most remarkable stories on election night could come from Thirsk and Malton, Grantham and Bourne, Bexhill and Battle and Skipton and Ripon. The list could go on.
"The birthplace of Margaret Thatcher now has a Labour MP..."
Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.
It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.
The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction. Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.
Its not about supporting Putin though is it. Its whether you support the policy towards the ukraine war which at present seems to be providing endless weapons so more people can be slaughtered or whether you give peace a chance.
With a bit of effort, it's a warm day, I think I can spot the tiniest flaw and a small gap in the reasoning here.
At the 2019 election, the Conservatives were completely dominant in three of these five constituency groups – ‘The Shires’, ‘Comfortable and Commuting’ and ‘Marginal and Mixed’, giving them a clear majority across England and Wales.
Yet, our projections for 2024 show that the Tories are collapsing in their own rural and small town heartlands. In ‘The Shires’, where in 2019 the party held 114 of 116 seats, we estimate in Tory-held seats an average Tory to Labour swing of +21, leaving the party holding on to just 25 seats.
These seats are typically middle class, overwhelmingly white with older populations and many homeowners. Many are places where the Conservatives have long held power, even throughout the Blair years when Labour extended their reach into the constituencies of Middle England.
In Hexham, Northumberland, Labour are likely to win for the first time, after 100 years of Conservative dominance. In South West Norfolk, Labour are predicted to unseat former Prime Minister, Liz Truss, overturning a majority of over 26,000.
Some of the most remarkable stories on election night could come from Thirsk and Malton, Grantham and Bourne, Bexhill and Battle and Skipton and Ripon. The list could go on.
"The birthplace of Margaret Thatcher now has a Labour MP..."
I wonder what first attracted this chap to Nigel Farage?
Reform candidate Leslie Lilley said he would ‘slaughter migrants’
The 70-year-old conspiracy theorist who is likely to reap 20 per cent of the vote in Southend East & Rochford is Facebook friends with the fascist leader Gary Raikes
A Reform candidate said he would “slaughter” migrants arriving on small boats and “have their family taken out”.
Leslie Lilley, who is set to win almost 20 per cent of the vote in the Labour battleground seat of Southend East & Rochford, made the threats on the official Facebook account he uses to run his local campaign.
In a post in June 2020, Lilley reacted to the news of a small boat arriving in Dover saying: “I hope I’m near one of these scumbags one day I won’t run away I’ll slaughter them then have their family taken out.”
The same month, Lilley, now 70, railed against “more scum entering the UK”, adding “I hope your family get Robbed, Beaten or attacked”.
He also suggested Border Force vessels should have razor wire to tear small boats carrying migrants across the Channel, and commented “gas” along with several laughing emojis under a video of Muslims praying.
Lilley, who has also argued that the pandemic was a plan to “depopulate the world” and was “mass murder by government”, is one of the 41 Reform UK candidates who are “friends” on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the fascist leader.
I seriously think I’m going to set up a UK political vetting company.
I am really worried about this Country, worried about the amount of people who are willing to vote for Farage's bunch of crackpots and racists, even after hearing views like this, and particularly worried about 2029, when Farage and his like could be very near the levers of power, I really hope the Tory party gets it act in gear, and as Big G said, become a one nation conservative party again, but I fear the worst
The only way that the like of Farage (and a whole lot worse) get defeated, is for the more mainsteam parties to actually listen to what their supporters are saying, and materially make their life better. Many of those voting for Farage feel they have no mainstream voice supporting them.
I’m reminded of the famous Michael Moore video from 2016, where he explains to a coastal liberal audience why people in ‘left-behind’ communities are voting for Trump in huge numbers. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vMm5HfxNXY4
This is so so so important to stress.
I read some posts on here with slight bemusement. It is as if Brexit never happened, as if those voters went away somewhere or their sense of frustration and disillusionment was magically fixed by the Tories setting themselves up for defeat.
This isn’t going away. And I will continue to bang the drum on here and elsewhere. I don’t want a populist right government. I want sensible, competent government that listens to its people, is willing to have the difficult conversations around things the establishment classes would rather we didn’t talk about, and embraces the need for (small r) reform of the way our society works.
If these voters and communities continue to be ignored then we will get chancers like Farage in power within about a decade.
People interpret that instruction to listen to left behind communities and make their lives better in two different ways, and I think there's an important distinction to make.
Making their lives better: yes, absolutely, and because neither the populist right nor the traditional free market liberals and their left of centre counterparts have known how to do that, the despondency has remained.
Echoing their rhetoric with more rhetoric or with policies that might superficially appeal to them but are economically damaging to their interests: no, that's exactly what the Tories have done and it makes things worse.
Yes - the way the Tories go about it is to spout culture war rhetoric and hope that it gets people on side, without actually changing things. That is not the solution.
Neither is inviting snake oil salesmen into government who promise the moon on a stick but cannot deliver.
But the country is crying out for someone who listens, who speaks the language of left behind communities. Who can explain challenges, sell solutions (which will not please everyone) and can restructure our economy and our institutions. I don’t think that person is SKS. Whether someone in the Labour Party may be able to seize that mantle, it is difficult to say. It is hard to look at the Tory Party and see any solutions there.
At the 2019 election, the Conservatives were completely dominant in three of these five constituency groups – ‘The Shires’, ‘Comfortable and Commuting’ and ‘Marginal and Mixed’, giving them a clear majority across England and Wales.
Yet, our projections for 2024 show that the Tories are collapsing in their own rural and small town heartlands. In ‘The Shires’, where in 2019 the party held 114 of 116 seats, we estimate in Tory-held seats an average Tory to Labour swing of +21, leaving the party holding on to just 25 seats.
These seats are typically middle class, overwhelmingly white with older populations and many homeowners. Many are places where the Conservatives have long held power, even throughout the Blair years when Labour extended their reach into the constituencies of Middle England.
In Hexham, Northumberland, Labour are likely to win for the first time, after 100 years of Conservative dominance. In South West Norfolk, Labour are predicted to unseat former Prime Minister, Liz Truss, overturning a majority of over 26,000.
Some of the most remarkable stories on election night could come from Thirsk and Malton, Grantham and Bourne, Bexhill and Battle and Skipton and Ripon. The list could go on.
"The birthplace of Margaret Thatcher now has a Labour MP..."
Lady Thatcher on maximum rotisserie setting.
Rotisserie? Is she roasting in hell?
Would be the assumption of the journo making the comment!
A famous employment tribunal case established that it is quite legal to be rude to scousers on the grounds that regional accents and identities are not protected characteristics.
Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.
This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.
Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.
This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.
Comments
I've always said I'm more of a liberal than a conservative.
Nobody is forced to tolerate being surrounded by antisocial behaviour. If people are doing anything illegal, that should be stopped. If people don't like their neighbours doing entirely legal actions, they are the antisocial ones and can move if they please.
New Statesman 96
More in Common 155
I'll let you know if you win.
She was asking advice as to how likely that was and as a neutral on the SKS fan front it was only right she was aware of the consequences of voting for the continuation Tory Red team in respect of NHS reform austerity etc.
3B The circumstances referred to in subsection (3A)(c) are where V [the voter] is about to mark, is in the process of marking, or has just marked, a ballot paper sent to V for voting by post at the election.
One of you at least will be wrong - probably both of you.
Under FPTP, the extremists become entryists and still get elected.
Very old school Labour, very old school controlling behaviour/ misogyny.
Best delete those WhatsApps sharpish BJO!
When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction.
Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]
I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.
I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.
If it does, there ought to be consequences, but you don't need NIMBYs or planning to deal with that.
The New Statesman is Ben Walker's refinement of EC's Strong Transition Model.
The Economist appears to be a UNS model c. 1973.
(b)otherwise obtain or attempt to obtain in a polling station information as to the candidate for whom a voter in that station is about to vote or has voted;
Much that I think @bigjohnowls has broken parts of paragraph 3 I don't think its 3B, 3A on the other hand....
Sell Tories also strikes me as good value; while they could go as low as 50, they're surely not going to go as high as 200.
Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.
Then it all comes down to will Labour do better than expected, or will the Conservatives?
🦕 Here is our @TheEconomist @wethinkpolling MRP!
And @JamesFransham has updated our Britain prediction model methodology.
This is how we're thinking about the election (with maps + charts!) 🧵
Today, we have published our MRP with @wethinkpolling
:
Lab 465 (+263)
Con 76 (-289)
LDem 52 (+41)
SNP 29 (-19)
Reform 3 (+3)
Green 3 (+2)
PC 3 (-1)
@TheEconomist
/
@wethinkpolling
N=18595
30th May - 21st June
https://x.com/OwenWntr/status/1805977883447287832
One of Josh Whedon's little nods to his time spent growing up over here.
You don't think it's okay for neighbours to cause a nuisance by creating lots of noise.
You do think it's okay for neighbours to deprive their neighbours of natural sunlight by building tall buildings.
I don't think most people would draw such a strong distinction between these two things as you do. You're definitely interesting to study.
(3B)The circumstances referred to in subsection (3A)(c) are where V is about to mark, is in the process of marking, or has just marked, a ballot paper sent to V for voting by post at the election.
Confusing, I know but I didn't write it.
After someone on here encouraged me to do so, I'm doing another spreadsheet this year which will hopefully predict what the result will be in each constituency assuming the overall result is X, and then we can compare the actual result to that.
I must admit, I've been rather taken aback by the Putin stuff. I knew Nigel was not entirely trustworthy on Ukraine - but I thought he'd at least try to come across as such. And I'm quite staggered there are quite so many out and out Putinistas among Reform candidates. I'm slightly surprised there are that many Putinistas in the country.
I think Sandpit's right on Nigel - he's spent too much time in America and is looking through the wrong Overton window - but I'm surprised at the rest of them. Not that there are cranks in Reform (or indeed any other party) - but that their crankery is so consistent.
I'd be interested to know if the Greens are the same.
I read some posts on here with slight bemusement. It is as if Brexit never happened, as if those voters went away somewhere or their sense of frustration and disillusionment was magically fixed by the Tories setting themselves up for defeat.
This isn’t going away. And I will continue to bang the drum on here and elsewhere. I don’t want a populist right government. I want sensible, competent government that listens to its people, is willing to have the difficult conversations around things the establishment classes would rather we didn’t talk about, and embraces the need for (small r) reform of the way our society works.
If these voters and communities continue to be ignored then we will get chancers like Farage in power within about a decade.
Gives Newton Abbot as a Con HOLD by 0.2% winning margin!!
Every vote will count down here
Good weather
England still in major football tournament
Anticipation of Tory rout next week
The weather is due to break later this week and England are then due to make their usual tame exit.
'This doesn't mean MRP is worthless! It has already taught us something very valuable about the election – that the Conservatives are likely to substantially underperform uniform swing. If we were relying on national polling alone, our view might be very different.’
In an election when what motivates a lot of us is booting out the tories (apologies to those who find vengeance distasteful) this tactical and regional voting is likely to pep up the excitement on the night. There could be, well there will be, some remarkable individual seat results.
Nick Wallis"
https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/gareth-jenkins-the-incredible-witness
The Economist’s final prediction points to a Tory wipeout in Britain
Opposition parties are inflicting damage on the Conservatives from all directions"
https://www.economist.com/britain/2024/06/26/the-economists-final-prediction-points-to-a-tory-wipeout-in-britain
Shares are Lab 42%, Con 22%, Ref 14%, LD 11%, Grn 6%.
Making their lives better: yes, absolutely, and because neither the populist right nor the traditional free market liberals and their left of centre counterparts have known how to do that, the despondency has remained.
Echoing their rhetoric with more rhetoric or with policies that might superficially appeal to them but are economically damaging to their interests: no, that's exactly what the Tories have done and it makes things worse.
Just in🔥
Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.
This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.
Buckle up!
https://x.com/UnityNewsNet/status/1805977955316678692
It really would be nice to see as much as possible of the Tory party wiped off the sole of the national shoe next week.
See the bit in bold. That's the point which this very male-dominated forum keeps on missing. Men who go into women's changing rooms and act as voyeurs (voyeurism is a crime, btw) making women feel uncomfortable and distressed - see the case of the nurses in Darlington - are not living their lives without hurting others.
They want to live their lives as they want regardless of whether or not they hurt others. In some cases, hurting women seems to be the aim. Why else would young masked men gather to shout abuse at women or hold up placards threatening violence against them.
That's the point which is missed and which, when raised on here or elsewhere, gets abuse or contemptuous dismissal, such as being told to shut up.
I always knew that Boris, Truss and Raaaaaaab were vacuous idiots (as I repeatedly said on here for years), but to me it has always been obvious that Farage was primarily interested in promoting himself (like Trump). His face on Brexit night when he realised that he had killed his own Euro-gravy train was the only heart warming moment of the evening.
Starmer does not worry me in the same way that the Tory chancers and wide-boys did. I think he will do his best for the country, but I do worry that he is more of a manager than a leader. I hope he has the vision and drive necessary to improve things.
The Conservatives OTOH are facing a serious breakdown it seems.
The Tory collapse in their rural heartlands
At the 2019 election, the Conservatives were completely dominant in three of these five constituency groups – ‘The Shires’, ‘Comfortable and Commuting’ and ‘Marginal and Mixed’, giving them a clear majority across England and Wales.
Yet, our projections for 2024 show that the Tories are collapsing in their own rural and small town heartlands. In ‘The Shires’, where in 2019 the party held 114 of 116 seats, we estimate in Tory-held seats an average Tory to Labour swing of +21, leaving the party holding on to just 25 seats.
These seats are typically middle class, overwhelmingly white with older populations and many homeowners. Many are places where the Conservatives have long held power, even throughout the Blair years when Labour extended their reach into the constituencies of Middle England.
In Hexham, Northumberland, Labour are likely to win for the first time, after 100 years of Conservative dominance. In South West Norfolk, Labour are predicted to unseat former Prime Minister, Liz Truss, overturning a majority of over 26,000.
Some of the most remarkable stories on election night could come from Thirsk and Malton, Grantham and Bourne, Bexhill and Battle and Skipton and Ripon. The list could go on.
Especially given a lot of people have already voted…
Lisa Smart, who is standing in the Stockport constituency of Hazel Grove, was recorded on a doorbell camera making the quip while out canvassing.
Ms Smart made the comment to a woman with a Liverpool accent who answered a door but explained it was not her house.
The local Labour and Conservative candidates condemned the comment as a "casual slur" and a "derogatory stereotype"."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd11xprd6ryo
“Stop the Supermajority” ?
It's the same as saying Muslims are terrorists, or Romanians are pickpockets, or gay men are paedophiles.
It's othering, pure and simple. And if you look at polling of women on this subject it gives the lie to the idea this is a battle between the sexes.
Much to the relief of Harry Enfield I suspect.
Presume the authors are in one of the Smug and Patronising seats.
Lady Thatcher on maximum rotisserie setting.
Neither is inviting snake oil salesmen into government who promise the moon on a stick but cannot deliver.
But the country is crying out for someone who listens, who speaks the language of left behind communities. Who can explain challenges, sell solutions (which will not please everyone) and can restructure our economy and our institutions. I don’t think that person is SKS. Whether someone in the Labour Party may be able to seize that mantle, it is difficult to say. It is hard to look at the Tory Party and see any solutions there.
Also 420,000 reserve personnel.
https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast