Howdy, Stranger!

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

It’s not getting any better for the Tories – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,158
edited July 4 in General
It’s not getting any better for the Tories – politicalbetting.com

First off, it’s worth saying what an historic election this is. It seems likely that the Conservatives will have the fewest MPs of recent times and possibly ever. We may see the largest ever swing between two major parties.

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,601
    First?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,983
    FPT

    A quick look at the state of the LLG vs RefCon combined votes in the most recent I can see online, and it's remarkable how little has changed since before the campaign started. All the noise has been between Con and Ref, and between the 3 centre-left parties.

    More in Common: 56:37
    Norstat: 57:38
    Ipsos: 60:34
    WeThink: 59:36
    JLP: 57:40 (JLP always the highest scoring for the right)
    Survation: 58:32 (that's the lowest for the right)
    R&W: 60:37

    So a range of only 4 points between highest and lowest LLP, and 8 between highest and lowest RefCon
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,837
    Reform 18 seats?!

    Hmmm...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031

    Impossible to pick a Portillo moment from this lot, going to be tough for the broadcasters to capture everything once the declarations are coming in thick and fast.

    Can't wait.

    A video montage this time, I think.
  • GrandcanyonGrandcanyon Posts: 105

    Impossible to pick a Portillo moment from this lot, going to be tough for the broadcasters to capture everything once the declarations are coming in thick and fast.

    Can't wait.

    Has to be Jacob Rees Mogg surely.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,261
    It would appear the 2024 UK general election is going to be somewhat sub-optimal for the Tories...
  • Looking at the Mirror article for the FindoutNow/Electoral Calculus MRP https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/bombshell-mega-poll-tory-wipeout-33113155 suggests Lib Dems on 71.

    This includes one gain from Labour - Cambridge!
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,239

    Scott_xP said:

    @johnestevens
    🚨Exclusive: Bombshell MRP poll shows Tories pushed into third place behind Lib Dems in election bloodbath

    20 Cabinet ministers projected to lose seats including Rishi Sunak

    https://x.com/johnestevens/status/1805994429540651250

    LAB 450
    LIB DEM 71
    CONS 60
    SNP 24
    REFUK 18 (!)
    GREEN 4
    PC 4

    MRP by Find Out Now and Electoral Calculus
    North Cotswolds - Reform?!!
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,866
    Late afternoon all :)

    This has all been evident for weeks if not months. The by-elections and the Clacton constituency poll all showed the Conservatives losing most ground in their strongest seats.

    We could easily see 25% or even a 30% swing in some seats next week if nothing changes.

    Extraordinary.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061

    Scott_xP said:

    @johnestevens
    🚨Exclusive: Bombshell MRP poll shows Tories pushed into third place behind Lib Dems in election bloodbath

    20 Cabinet ministers projected to lose seats including Rishi Sunak

    https://x.com/johnestevens/status/1805994429540651250

    LAB 450
    LIB DEM 71
    CONS 60
    SNP 24
    REFUK 18 (!)
    GREEN 4
    PC 4

    MRP by Find Out Now and Electoral Calculus
    North Cotswolds - Reform?!!
    Gateshead........
  • rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,239

    Scott_xP said:

    @johnestevens
    🚨Exclusive: Bombshell MRP poll shows Tories pushed into third place behind Lib Dems in election bloodbath

    20 Cabinet ministers projected to lose seats including Rishi Sunak

    https://x.com/johnestevens/status/1805994429540651250

    LAB 450
    LIB DEM 71
    CONS 60
    SNP 24
    REFUK 18 (!)
    GREEN 4
    PC 4

    MRP by Find Out Now and Electoral Calculus
    North Cotswolds - Reform?!!
    Also Pontypridd - Plaid.

    Yeah, I think the methodology might need a bit more refinement on this one.
  • PedestrianRockPedestrianRock Posts: 580
    pigeon said:

    Reform 18 seats?!

    Hmmm...

    I've looked a ton of the seats this MRP has Reform winning, and Electoral Calculus currently gives them a 1% chance in some of them.

    HOWEVER...

    Weeks ago when we were talking about @RochdalePioneers' 66/1 odds, I said that it might be a decent strategy to just put £1 each on the Lib Dems and Reform, in a bunch of seats where they were currently 50/1 - 100/1 odds or thereabouts - because when you get to lopsided poll shares, under FPTP there could turn out to be parties coming through the middle galore.

    I think for small stakes there might be value here or there on the above for unexpected wins.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    I'll be interested in the implied VI from Find out Now.......
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,009

    Scott_xP said:

    @johnestevens
    🚨Exclusive: Bombshell MRP poll shows Tories pushed into third place behind Lib Dems in election bloodbath

    20 Cabinet ministers projected to lose seats including Rishi Sunak

    https://x.com/johnestevens/status/1805994429540651250

    LAB 450
    LIB DEM 71
    CONS 60
    SNP 24
    REFUK 18 (!)
    GREEN 4
    PC 4

    MRP by Find Out Now and Electoral Calculus
    North Cotswolds - Reform?!!
    Gateshead........
    FA Trophy winners, 2023/24.
  • Impossible to pick a Portillo moment from this lot, going to be tough for the broadcasters to capture everything once the declarations are coming in thick and fast.

    Can't wait.

    Has to be Jacob Rees Mogg surely.
    Has to be, I don't think people hate Sunak enough, they just think he's useless. JRM represents everything that is wrong in many people's eyes. Maybe more of a Mellor v Goldsmith moment?
  • Scott_xP said:

    @johnestevens
    🚨Exclusive: Bombshell MRP poll shows Tories pushed into third place behind Lib Dems in election bloodbath

    20 Cabinet ministers projected to lose seats including Rishi Sunak

    https://x.com/johnestevens/status/1805994429540651250

    LAB 450
    LIB DEM 71
    CONS 60
    SNP 24
    REFUK 18 (!)
    GREEN 4
    PC 4

    MRP by Find Out Now and Electoral Calculus
    North Cotswolds - Reform?!!
    Difficult to tell on the Pixels what is where, but I really can't seen Reform winning Islington North.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,239
    I love the search & replace fail in the Mirror writeup of that MRP:

    "BreConservatives, Radnor and Cwm Tawe - Lib Dems"
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,077
    edited June 26
    pigeon said:

    Reform 18 seats?!

    Hmmm...

    I think this was before Farage went full Quisling on Putin, so it may be that the Tories are past the worst.

    Still they are going to get a kicking the like of which we have never seen in British politics, or indeed in British history.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,348
    kyf_100 said:

    Looking at the Mirror article for the FindoutNow/Electoral Calculus MRP https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/bombshell-mega-poll-tory-wipeout-33113155 suggests Lib Dems on 71.

    This includes one gain from Labour - Cambridge!

    A noteworthy entry from that Mirror article -

    "Richmond and Northallerton - Labour"

    If that happens there will be no more 'Portillo moments'. From now until the end of time, it will be a 'Rishi moment' instead.
    You'd be able to tell the story of the election campaign in two moments - Sunak calling it in the rain in Downing Street, and Sunak's concession speech from Richmond.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,968
    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883
    I love your turn of phrase, TSE, the last sentence made me splutter my coffee out...
  • mickydroymickydroy Posts: 316

    Impossible to pick a Portillo moment from this lot, going to be tough for the broadcasters to capture everything once the declarations are coming in thick and fast.

    Can't wait.

    Has to be Jacob Rees Mogg surely.
    Has to be, I don't think people hate Sunak enough, they just think he's useless. JRM represents everything that is wrong in many people's eyes. Maybe more of a Mellor v Goldsmith moment?
    Rees Mogg would be great, but personally I would love to see Mercer lose, horrible man
  • 18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    The current prediction on Baxters website is for 19 with low of 9 and high off 99.

    Irritatingly it dosent seem to list where these 19 are.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,362

    kyf_100 said:

    Looking at the Mirror article for the FindoutNow/Electoral Calculus MRP https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/bombshell-mega-poll-tory-wipeout-33113155 suggests Lib Dems on 71.

    This includes one gain from Labour - Cambridge!

    A noteworthy entry from that Mirror article -

    "Richmond and Northallerton - Labour"

    If that happens there will be no more 'Portillo moments'. From now until the end of time, it will be a 'Rishi moment' instead.
    You'd be able to tell the story of the election campaign in two moments - Sunak calling it in the rain in Downing Street, and Sunak's concession speech from Richmond.
    You wouldn't even need both videos - just show Downing Street and say it all went downhill from there.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    Labour has suspended a party member after being notified of their arrest in connection with the Westminster "honeytrap" scandal, the BBC understands.

    Police arrested a man in his mid-20s on suspicion of harassment and offences under the Online Safety Act in London on Wednesday.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpvv3lq79dro
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,983
    edited June 26

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

  • novanova Posts: 690
    Taz said:

    Labour to bring in automatic voter registration under plans to boost franchise

    Labour is planning to introduce automatic registration for voting under plans to add millions more people to the electoral roll for future elections, especially young people, the Guardian has learned.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/26/labour-automatic-voter-registration-reform-plans

    Starmer is not going to waste any opportunity to put finger on the scales once he gets power. Where as the Tories spent 14 years not really gaining a massive advantage of the much watered down redrawing constituencies (remember the more radical proposal originally was far fewer seats) and the voter id stuff which is nothing like the gerrymandering type stuff in the US.

    I can see a scandal coming of people being auto registered who end up not being eligible.

    Votes for 16 and auto enrolment.

    How long before compulsory voting ?

    I’m guessing the same people who condemned the Tories over their attempts to game the system will be as equally condemnatory here.
    Is making it easier to vote, worth equal condemnation with making voting harder?

  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,812
    edited June 26
    If Reform win 18 seats that would be an absolutely earth-shattering result.

    I can’t see beyond 5-7, and that’s on a very good day. 2 is more likely. 3, 1 and 0 are plausible.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,097
    TimS said:

    FPT

    A quick look at the state of the LLG vs RefCon combined votes in the most recent I can see online, and it's remarkable how little has changed since before the campaign started. All the noise has been between Con and Ref, and between the 3 centre-left parties.

    More in Common: 56:37
    Norstat: 57:38
    Ipsos: 60:34
    WeThink: 59:36
    JLP: 57:40 (JLP always the highest scoring for the right)
    Survation: 58:32 (that's the lowest for the right)
    R&W: 60:37

    So a range of only 4 points between highest and lowest LLP, and 8 between highest and lowest RefCon

    This means a DEM landslide. The GOP will be reduced to a rump.

    So let's switch their election over here. I don't see why not.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,601

    I love your turn of phrase, TSE, the last sentence made me splutter my coffee out...

    It's what I am noted for, by my friends, my staff, my boss, and PBers.

    It's also one of the reasons I decided to not become an MP,
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,129
    edited June 26

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    I agree; but if it did turn out that way (i.e. LD 71 C 60 R 18) would the prospect of being able to grab "official opposition" status back from the LDs make a merger wih Reform seem too attractive to decline for whoever is controlling the Tory party at that point?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,578

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    They're just people who don't care what their neighbours do.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,687
    I still refuse to believe all this.

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,207

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    The more parties, the lower share you need in any one place to win a seat and the screwier the outputs from FPTP.

    I suspect a lot of these Reform wins are places which used to be Con 60 Lab 15 Lib 15 Grn 5 Ref 5- lots of Conservative votes to reallocate, not much of a sign where to reallocate them.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,812
    pm215 said:

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    I agree; but if it did turn out that way (i.e. LD 71 C 60 R 18) would the prospect of being able to grab "official opposition" status back from the LDs make a merger wih Reform seem too attractive to decline for whoever is controlling the Tory party at that point?
    Yes.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,968

    If Reform win 18 seats that would be an absolutely earth-shattering result.

    I can’t see beyond 5-7, and that’s on a very good bad day. 2 is more likely. 3, 1 and 0 are plausible.

    FTFY. Like it otherwise.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    So the biggest Reform shares are now with YG, Redfield and Whitestone Insight, the rest are herding 15
  • mickydroy said:

    Impossible to pick a Portillo moment from this lot, going to be tough for the broadcasters to capture everything once the declarations are coming in thick and fast.

    Can't wait.

    Has to be Jacob Rees Mogg surely.
    Has to be, I don't think people hate Sunak enough, they just think he's useless. JRM represents everything that is wrong in many people's eyes. Maybe more of a Mellor v Goldsmith moment?
    Rees Mogg would be great, but personally I would love to see Mercer lose, horrible man
    Yes, his conduct during the campaign alone would make it richly deserved. It's niche though, lots of people won't know who he is.

    Truss getting punted, on the other hand, that would bring the nation together.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,046
    It’s not getting any better for the Tories

    No kidding. At this point extinction level event (eg around 50 seats) is more likely than 150 seats.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,651

    pm215 said:

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    I agree; but if it did turn out that way (i.e. LD 71 C 60 R 18) would the prospect of being able to grab "official opposition" status back from the LDs make a merger wih Reform seem too attractive to decline for whoever is controlling the Tory party at that point?
    Yes.
    But... How many of the 60 Con would feel unable to work with Farage and join the LDs? It would only need 4 to make the LDs the OO again.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,601

    I still refuse to believe all this.

    I have a friend who is a pollster and Labour supporter, he sent me a link to the Kübler-Ross model.

    He's at denial and I am the acceptance stage.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,261
    edited June 26
    Just think if the Lib-Dems do replace CON as the official Opposition next week and things go bad for LAB in government we may have a Lib-Dem government in 2029! :open_mouth:
  • eekeek Posts: 28,362
    edited June 26
    FPT (Sorry)
    Heathener said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    TimS said:

    DeclanF said:

    Chris said:

    viewcode said:

    Carnyx said:

    TOPPING said:

    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 following is a quote from the Guardian entry on its election page. The entry is here: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jun/26/uk-general-election-live-updates-tories-labour-betting-scandal?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with:block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855#block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855

    "...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.
    There have been enough instances of non-trans people (men!) installing peepholes or cameras in female bathrooms and spaces or even dressing up in rubber "woman" suits

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1385889/Joel-Hardman-wore-female-rubber-mask-wig-spy-women-public-toilets.html

    Besides, what do we do with trans-men? Should this guy be told to use the ladies just because his birth certificate says "female"?

    image
    The men don’t care who uses the men’s room.
    Not only is that completely wrong, it is not the point. If Trans-women are not women and should use the men's toilets then trans-men are not men and should use the women's toilets.

    You cannot say that birth is biology and then claim it only applies to one group.

    As to your earlier point, how many lads would be comfortable at the urinals whilst this person uses her "birth gender toilet"?

    image
    The complaints about bathrooms and changing rooms and prisons and shelters and sports days are not coming from men, the complaints are coming exclusively from women.
    Some women. Not even a majority. Most of us have no problem if trans women prefer to use ‘our’ spaces, especially as I’m sure they feel safer.

    As ever, a strident minority who shout loudest seem to think they represent the majority. Well they don’t.

    Let’s move on from this. It’s petty.
    It's worth saying that I've met the nurse the other nurses in Darlington Hospital are complaining about - shall we just say I can see why they have concerns frankly she gave me the creeps...
  • GrandcanyonGrandcanyon Posts: 105

    I still refuse to believe all this.

    Then you can make a fortune on the spreads. Buy conservative seats at £500 per point.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,601
    kle4 said:

    It’s not getting any better for the Tories

    No kidding. At this point extinction level event (eg around 50 seats) is more likely than 150 seats.

    We are at a stage where VI polls and MRPs show the Lib Dems ahead of the Tories in seats and it no longer feels like a shock.
  • TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    Whatever, but someone will be superseeding him before too many more years pass, whether he loses Ukraine or goosesteps up Kiev High Street in a triumphant parade for the same reason that John Smith was suceeded a Labour Leader.

    While he is ruthless, he is not crazy. We might not be so lucky with who follows.
  • PedestrianRockPedestrianRock Posts: 580
    edited June 26

    pm215 said:

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    I agree; but if it did turn out that way (i.e. LD 71 C 60 R 18) would the prospect of being able to grab "official opposition" status back from the LDs make a merger wih Reform seem too attractive to decline for whoever is controlling the Tory party at that point?
    Yes.
    But... How many of the 60 Con would feel unable to work with Farage and join the LDs? It would only need 4 to make the LDs the OO again.
    It would essentially be for those Tories to decide who they would rather sit with.

    Whoever is the official opposition out of the Lib Dems or the newly combined Tory Reform force, would surely have the better chance in 2029…

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,097

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    Given your (correct imo) assessment of Farage as a grubby little racist it still surprises me that you voted for him in 2019. Ok, the Euro elections, but still. I would have thought no nose-peg could have been quite strong enough.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,578
    GIN1138 said:

    Just think if the Lib-Dems do replace CON as the official Opposition next week and things go bad for LAB in government we may have a Lib-Dem government in 2029! :open_mouth:

    Lib Dem government and Reform (or equivalent) opposition isn't implausible.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,968
    edited June 26
    kinabalu said:

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    Given your (correct imo) assessment of Farage as a grubby little racist it still surprises me that you voted for him in 2019. Ok, the Euro elections, but still. I would have thought no nose-peg could have been quite strong enough.
    I voted for him to be ousted from [the European] Parliament, not elected into it.

    And Theresa "Go Home" May was not much of a better alternative.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited June 26
    Labour’s net zero target could cost ‘hundreds of billions’, leaked audio reveals
    Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury’s answers at public event suggest party’s spending could go far beyond public declarations

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/labour-net-zero-plans-hundreds-billions-darren-jones-audio/

    One strange thing about all of this, is it will be using PFI, which was absolutely toxic only a few years ago. The media used to run stories every week about how it cost £300 to change a light bulb or they couldn't mow their own sports field, because a moron from government didn't read the small print of PFI contracts.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,796
    Cicero said:

    pigeon said:

    Reform 18 seats?!

    Hmmm...

    I think this was before Farage went full Quisling on Putin, so it may be that the Tories are past the worst.

    Still they are going to get a kicking the like of which we have never seen in British politics, or indeed in British history.
    Agincourt?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,097

    kyf_100 said:

    Looking at the Mirror article for the FindoutNow/Electoral Calculus MRP https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/bombshell-mega-poll-tory-wipeout-33113155 suggests Lib Dems on 71.

    This includes one gain from Labour - Cambridge!

    A noteworthy entry from that Mirror article -

    "Richmond and Northallerton - Labour"

    If that happens there will be no more 'Portillo moments'. From now until the end of time, it will be a 'Rishi moment' instead.
    You'd be able to tell the story of the election campaign in two moments - Sunak calling it in the rain in Downing Street, and Sunak's concession speech from Richmond.
    They needed the best election campaign of all time and delivered the worst.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,866

    I still refuse to believe all this.

    Two thoughts, you may be right or it's the old adage - the more you refuse to believe something will happen, the more likely it is to happen.

    It's outside our experience therefore we don't accept it.

    IF it is wrong and the Conservatives come out the other side with 120 seats there will be a lot of egg on a lot of faces. If it's 50-80 seats, it'll be a different story.

    What do you think will happen - we still have a week, a lifetime in politics as someone once said. Sunak may be brilliant tonight and rally the Conservative vote but it really is the last orders in the last chance saloon.

    Except...

    We know the Conservatives will play the social media card hard in the last 72 hours.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,261

    GIN1138 said:

    Just think if the Lib-Dems do replace CON as the official Opposition next week and things go bad for LAB in government we may have a Lib-Dem government in 2029! :open_mouth:

    Lib Dem government and Reform (or equivalent) opposition isn't implausible.
    What happens to Labour? They end up going the same way as the Liberals after their 1906 election triumph?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,540
    Which organisation is forecasting 18 seats for Ref?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Andy_JS said:

    Which organisation is forecasting 18 seats for Ref?

    Find Out Now
  • It won't happen but this would be hugely entertaining:

    https://x.com/NicholasTyrone/status/1806000575135297617
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,077

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    Whatever, but someone will be superseeding him before too many more years pass, whether he loses Ukraine or goosesteps up Kiev High Street in a triumphant parade for the same reason that John Smith was suceeded a Labour Leader.

    While he is ruthless, he is not crazy. We might not be so lucky with who follows.
    Well, that depends how far the regime has been weakened. Most of the current mob have simply sat in horrified silence. Without Putin, other voices will be raised.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,362
    stodge said:

    I still refuse to believe all this.

    Two thoughts, you may be right or it's the old adage - the more you refuse to believe something will happen, the more likely it is to happen.

    It's outside our experience therefore we don't accept it.

    IF it is wrong and the Conservatives come out the other side with 120 seats there will be a lot of egg on a lot of faces. If it's 50-80 seats, it'll be a different story.

    What do you think will happen - we still have a week, a lifetime in politics as someone once said. Sunak may be brilliant tonight and rally the Conservative vote but it really is the last orders in the last chance saloon.

    Except...

    We know the Conservatives will play the social media card hard in the last 72 hours.
    The problem is that a lot of votes have already been cast so can't be refused.

    Which means I voted Labour and was then presented with a Labour leaflet on small boat migrants that was so misdirected I would have voted Lib Dem if it had arrived 4 hours earlier...
  • PedestrianRockPedestrianRock Posts: 580

    Labour’s net zero target could cost ‘hundreds of billions’, leaked audio reveals
    Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury’s answers at public event suggest party’s spending could go far beyond public declarations

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/labour-net-zero-plans-hundreds-billions-darren-jones-audio/

    Hundreds of billions of pounds by 2050 to decarbonise the whole economy? Despite the sensationalist headline, that doesn’t actually sound like that much money or that unreasonable, over a timescale of 26 years…
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,028
    Such an odd election. But the result next week is going to be utterly seismic. I’m unsure why we’ve not heard more discontent from Tory MPs tbh
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,084
    edited June 26
    *** BETTING POST ***

    Fantastic win by Emma Raducanu. She beats a top 10 opponent for the first time. That comes on top of some stunning form from Katie Boulter.

    British ladies tennis is in good shape right now.

    As of earlier this afternoon you could still get Raducanu at 30/1 for Wimbledon and Boulter at 70/1.

    Will they do it? Probably not but those are attractive odds.

    xx
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,046
    nova said:

    Taz said:

    Labour to bring in automatic voter registration under plans to boost franchise

    Labour is planning to introduce automatic registration for voting under plans to add millions more people to the electoral roll for future elections, especially young people, the Guardian has learned.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/26/labour-automatic-voter-registration-reform-plans

    Starmer is not going to waste any opportunity to put finger on the scales once he gets power. Where as the Tories spent 14 years not really gaining a massive advantage of the much watered down redrawing constituencies (remember the more radical proposal originally was far fewer seats) and the voter id stuff which is nothing like the gerrymandering type stuff in the US.

    I can see a scandal coming of people being auto registered who end up not being eligible.

    Votes for 16 and auto enrolment.

    How long before compulsory voting ?

    I’m guessing the same people who condemned the Tories over their attempts to game the system will be as equally condemnatory here.
    Is making it easier to vote, worth equal condemnation with making voting harder?

    I don't think that's a reasonable summary of it though.

    I don't support the Tories' voter ID changes*, but not all changes 'making it easier to vote' are automatically a good thing.

    To take it to an extreme, votes at 12 would be making it easier to vote, but most people would not support that, quite reasonably. Allowing any foreign nationals to vote in all elections would be making it easier to vote, but would that be fair and reasonable, when to my knowledge no country operates that widely?

    On votes at 16 I am not in favour of it, but it is a simple change to enact and for whatever reason support for it has been growing among political circles, so I'm more or less resigned to it.

    Electoral changes tend to be proposed because those doing it think they will benefit, and whether they do or not not if they are reasonable they stick around. So Labour believing they will gain an advantage is not intrinsically wrong if the principal is still sound, or at least arguable.

    But it is also the case that just because something is proposed for a supposedly positive reason, does not mean it is a good idea. Some people support electronic voting as it would be faster and you coudl do it from your phone or something, but in fact it is a terrible idea.

    Auto-enrollment I'd need to see more details about, as it sounds reasonable but what is the reason it is not already the case (evil Tories cannot always be the answer).

    *Weirdly, Labour are not proposing reversing the Tory voter ID changes.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,046

    Such an odd election. But the result next week is going to be utterly seismic. I’m unsure why we’ve not heard more discontent from Tory MPs tbh

    It was always going to be a tough election for them. But a poor campaign, bad luck, and rock bottom morale have compounded things to make it a horrendous election.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454

    Labour’s net zero target could cost ‘hundreds of billions’, leaked audio reveals
    Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury’s answers at public event suggest party’s spending could go far beyond public declarations

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/labour-net-zero-plans-hundreds-billions-darren-jones-audio/

    One strange thing about all of this, is it will be using PFI, which was absolutely toxic only a few years ago. The media used to run stories every week about how it cost £300 to change a light bulb or they couldn't mow their own sports field, because a moron from government didn't read the small print of PFI contracts.

    I work in this area and “didn’t read the small print of PFI contracts” is a total mischaracterisation of the issue.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,410
    edited June 26
    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited June 26
    The MRPs are heavily reliant on proportional swing happening of course, you need to factor in to your betting how confident you are that swing will be proportional rather than UNS like
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,540

    Andy_JS said:

    Which organisation is forecasting 18 seats for Ref?

    Find Out Now
    Ta.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,895
    "After July 5th I suspect the only way Rishi Sunak and all other Tories will be able to talk about the election defeat will be in a therapist’s office with dolls."

    Genuine ROFL there
  • The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:

    Ashfield.
    Barnsley South
    Boston & Skegness.
    Broadland and Fakenham.
    Burton and Uttoxeter.
    Cannock Chase
    Clacton.
    Cotswold North.
    Fareham and Waterlooville.
    Gosport.
    Great Yarmouth.
    Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes)
    Louth and Horncastle.
    Orpington.
    Plymouth Moor View.
    Skipton and Ripon.
    Suffolk South.
    Washington and Gateshead South.


  • mickydroymickydroy Posts: 316
    I'm still not connvinced that the Torys are going to fall so hard and fast, but given the inbuilt bias towards the Tory party in this country, if I were a Labour party member, be careful what you wish for, if it can happen to the Tory Party, it can sure as hell happen to the Labour party
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,983

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    Whatever, but someone will be superseeding him before too many more years pass, whether he loses Ukraine or goosesteps up Kiev High Street in a triumphant parade for the same reason that John Smith was suceeded a Labour Leader.

    While he is ruthless, he is not crazy. We might not be so lucky with who follows.
    These are so carbon copy as talking points I almost wonder if you’re being dictated them.

    The war is a catastrophe for Russia. The only thing keeping it going is the pride and political investment of the regime. Even if Putin is succeeded by an extremist it’s very likely one of the first things they do is bring the boys home.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,812
    edited June 26

    pm215 said:

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    I agree; but if it did turn out that way (i.e. LD 71 C 60 R 18) would the prospect of being able to grab "official opposition" status back from the LDs make a merger wih Reform seem too attractive to decline for whoever is controlling the Tory party at that point?
    Yes.
    But... How many of the 60 Con would feel unable to work with Farage and join the LDs? It would only need 4 to make the LDs the OO again.
    It would essentially be for those Tories to decide who they would rather sit with.

    Whoever is the official opposition out of the Lib Dems or the newly combined Tory Reform force, would surely have the better chance in 2029…

    Hmmm. If we did get a LD official opposition, I am not tremendously convinced that delivers a Lab/LD contest in 2028-9.

    For one thing the opposition parties are going to be so close-ish on seat count that the broadcasters are probably going to have to change the balance rules.

    Then you have the fact that REFCON are cumulatively polling about 33% whereas the LDs are polling around 11-13%.

    In all likelihood in makes Labours job much easier because it dilutes the opposition message, being split between LD, CON, REF.

    Look at Canada for parallels. They’ve had parties relegated to third or worse before that then make comebacks.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,097
    Heathener said:

    *** BETTING POST ***

    Fantastic win by Emma Raducanu. She beats a top 10 opponent for the first time. That comes on top of some stunning form from Katie Boulter.

    British ladies tennis is in good shape right now.

    As of earlier this afternoon you could still get Raducanu at 30/1 for Wimbledon and Boulter at 70/1.

    Will they do it? Probably not but those are attractive odds.

    xx

    Yes I'm on Emma at 38. I expect her to go deep. And the men's is all about the new Big 2 imo. Alcaraz and Sinner. That rivalry should drive the sport for years now.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,046
    edited June 26

    It won't happen but this would be hugely entertaining:

    https://x.com/NicholasTyrone/status/1806000575135297617

    Focusing on the poll that predicts that Braverman (among others) would lose her heat, and the Tories coming behind the LDs, that does raise an interesting question for the future, as numbertwelve also addresses - could the LDs hold onto second spot longer term, or would some new Tory/Reform option come back a lot at the next election?

    Probably the latter, because unless the LDs became a lot more small c conservative, it seems there would be too big a chunk of the public who want a centre right option to support a government and main opposition both being centre to centre-left.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited June 26

    Labour’s net zero target could cost ‘hundreds of billions’, leaked audio reveals
    Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury’s answers at public event suggest party’s spending could go far beyond public declarations

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/labour-net-zero-plans-hundreds-billions-darren-jones-audio/

    One strange thing about all of this, is it will be using PFI, which was absolutely toxic only a few years ago. The media used to run stories every week about how it cost £300 to change a light bulb or they couldn't mow their own sports field, because a moron from government didn't read the small print of PFI contracts.

    I work in this area and “didn’t read the small print of PFI contracts” is a total mischaracterisation of the issue.
    I was obviously being somewhat facetious. But particular under last Labour government, the number and scope of PFI deals that were signed that ended up absolutely terrible for the tax payer.

    It went from a minor thing that was basically sold as a way for the government to get the private sector to take on some risk / upgrading infrastructure through a mortgage type deal, to under Brown basically how everything was done (and at the time off the books).
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,568
    Heathener said:

    *** BETTING POST ***

    Fantastic win by Emma Raducanu. She beats a top 10 opponent for the first time. That comes on top of some stunning form from Katie Boulter.

    British ladies tennis is in good shape right now.

    As of earlier this afternoon you could still get Raducanu at 30/1 for Wimbledon and Boulter at 70/1.

    Will they do it? Probably not but those are attractive odds.

    xx

    Sabalenka and Swiatek are so dominant that it's hard to see one of them doesn't win. The French open ladies final was a steamrollering, since only one of them was in it.

    30/1 is a fun flutter nonetheless.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,968
    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    Whatever, but someone will be superseeding him before too many more years pass, whether he loses Ukraine or goosesteps up Kiev High Street in a triumphant parade for the same reason that John Smith was suceeded a Labour Leader.

    While he is ruthless, he is not crazy. We might not be so lucky with who follows.
    These are so carbon copy as talking points I almost wonder if you’re being dictated them.

    The war is a catastrophe for Russia. The only thing keeping it going is the pride and political investment of the regime. Even if Putin is succeeded by an extremist it’s very likely one of the first things they do is bring the boys home.
    Indeed.

    Its quite probable this war ends with Putin stepping too close to a window, then his successor ending this misadventure.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,046
    edited June 26

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
    It may not be certain whoever followed Putin would be worse, but it would seem prudent to think that might be so, or that any replacement would be of similar substance.

    However, similar but not exact could still be enough for significant changes. Even a horrible dictator replacement might make different choices if only to preserve their own power and place.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    edited June 26

    Labour’s net zero target could cost ‘hundreds of billions’, leaked audio reveals
    Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury’s answers at public event suggest party’s spending could go far beyond public declarations

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/labour-net-zero-plans-hundreds-billions-darren-jones-audio/

    One strange thing about all of this, is it will be using PFI, which was absolutely toxic only a few years ago. The media used to run stories every week about how it cost £300 to change a light bulb or they couldn't mow their own sports field, because a moron from government didn't read the small print of PFI contracts.

    Whoever formed the next government a central question will be about how to massage spending, since spending has to happen. Net zero would cost what it costs whoever governs.

    The current main route (Tory and Labour) to massaging spending is by the bogus formula for borrowing: It's OK as long as there is a paper plan to get net debt to fall as a % of GDP in the fifth year of the five year plan.

    the bogus bit is this:

    In 2024 this applies to the paper plan in 2029
    In 2025 it applies to 2030
    In 2030 it applies to 2035 etc for ever. You never deliver. It's a fraud.

    PFI restoration would be another possible bogus plan. The one after that is to raid the piggy bank of all children under 4. There isn't one after that.

    Watch this one. It will be interesting.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454

    Labour’s net zero target could cost ‘hundreds of billions’, leaked audio reveals
    Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury’s answers at public event suggest party’s spending could go far beyond public declarations

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/labour-net-zero-plans-hundreds-billions-darren-jones-audio/

    One strange thing about all of this, is it will be using PFI, which was absolutely toxic only a few years ago. The media used to run stories every week about how it cost £300 to change a light bulb or they couldn't mow their own sports field, because a moron from government didn't read the small print of PFI contracts.

    I work in this area and “didn’t read the small print of PFI contracts” is a total mischaracterisation of the issue.
    I was obviously being somewhat facetious. But particular under last Labour government, huge number of PFI deals were signed that were absolutely terrible for the tax payer.
    Not in of their own right. The issue is the gutting of local authority and NHS legal teams and as such the public sector not having any idea what they are entitled to under such contracts, not the contracts themselves in a lot of cases.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,197
    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    Whatever, but someone will be superseeding him before too many more years pass, whether he loses Ukraine or goosesteps up Kiev High Street in a triumphant parade for the same reason that John Smith was suceeded a Labour Leader.

    While he is ruthless, he is not crazy. We might not be so lucky with who follows.
    These are so carbon copy as talking points I almost wonder if you’re being dictated them.

    The war is a catastrophe for Russia. The only thing keeping it going is the pride and political investment of the regime. Even if Putin is succeeded by an extremist it’s very likely one of the first things they do is bring the boys home.
    It reminds me of the thinking that a coup against Hitler in 1939 would leave the German General Staff in charge of Germany, and this would be more dangerous.

    That was the position of the War Office and the Foreign Office in the UK - when the generals opposed to Hitler reached out.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,960
    edited June 26

    Labour’s net zero target could cost ‘hundreds of billions’, leaked audio reveals
    Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury’s answers at public event suggest party’s spending could go far beyond public declarations

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/labour-net-zero-plans-hundreds-billions-darren-jones-audio/

    One strange thing about all of this, is it will be using PFI, which was absolutely toxic only a few years ago. The media used to run stories every week about how it cost £300 to change a light bulb or they couldn't mow their own sports field, because a moron from government didn't read the small print of PFI contracts.

    I work in this area and “didn’t read the small print of PFI contracts” is a total mischaracterisation of the issue.
    I was obviously being somewhat facetious. But particular under last Labour government, huge number of PFI deals were signed that were absolutely terrible for the tax payer.
    Not in of their own right. The issue is the gutting of local authority and NHS legal teams and as such the public sector not having any idea what they are entitled to under such contracts, not the contracts themselves in a lot of cases.
    The service elements that many included were one aspect (which is where you get the more stupid stories of £300 to change a light bulb), many turned out horrendously expensive, more pay day lender than mortgage. Mostly driven by Brown desire to shove it all off the books so he could meet his golden rules.

    Now they can't shove it off the books, but lets see if any lessons have been learned about costing of these things.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,410
    kle4 said:

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
    It may not be certain whoever followed Putin would be worse, but it would seem prudent to think that might be so, or that any replacement would be of similar substance.

    However, similar but not exact could still be enough for significant changes. Even a horrible dictator replacement might make different choices if only to preserve their own power and place.
    Quite. I fear we're in danger of dressing up sarcasm about 'bingo cards' as an actual argument.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    Whatever, but someone will be superseeding him before too many more years pass, whether he loses Ukraine or goosesteps up Kiev High Street in a triumphant parade for the same reason that John Smith was suceeded a Labour Leader.

    While he is ruthless, he is not crazy. We might not be so lucky with who follows.
    All of that is irrelevant as far as our foreign policy is concerned.
    Who leads Russia is their problem; we have to deal with whoever it might be.

    And I think you mean supersede, not superseed…
  • sbjme19sbjme19 Posts: 194

    The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:

    Ashfield.
    Barnsley South
    Boston & Skegness.
    Broadland and Fakenham.
    Burton and Uttoxeter.
    Cannock Chase
    Clacton.
    Cotswold North.
    Fareham and Waterlooville.
    Gosport.
    Great Yarmouth.
    Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes)
    Louth and Horncastle.
    Orpington.
    Plymouth Moor View.
    Skipton and Ripon.
    Suffolk South.
    Washington and Gateshead South.


    Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,046
    pm215 said:

    18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.

    I agree; but if it did turn out that way (i.e. LD 71 C 60 R 18) would the prospect of being able to grab "official opposition" status back from the LDs make a merger wih Reform seem too attractive to decline for whoever is controlling the Tory party at that point?
    I think if the Tories are reduced to below 100, which is likely, then whether Reform get 1 seat or 18 only matters in terms of negotiating position - whoever leads the Tories at that point will probably be desperate for merger or alliance.

    As some speculate it might cost them a few Wets, but in terms of voter base it would probably be much larger.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,983

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
    I don’t need that to be the case for Putin’s fall to be good news. All I need is for the successor to be less keen on wiping out Ukraine and imposing the Russian world on its neighbours. Tell a Ukrainian that Putin is being gentle with them.

    Indeed it seems very unlikely they get a friendly pro-Westerner any time soon. We were talking about natural causes death anyway, not revolution. But that doesn’t matter.

    But there is plenty of history of tyrants shuffling off the stage and their successors taking the opportunity to reboot when there are catastrophic wars or domestic policies, even when the successors are monsters themselves.

  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 21,968

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
    In the past 35 years?

    Ukraine
    Estonia
    Georgia
    Latvia
    Lithuania
    Poland

    There's no guarantees it will happen, but plenty of precedence that it could.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,197

    TimS said:

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    Whatever, but someone will be superseeding him before too many more years pass, whether he loses Ukraine or goosesteps up Kiev High Street in a triumphant parade for the same reason that John Smith was suceeded a Labour Leader.

    While he is ruthless, he is not crazy. We might not be so lucky with who follows.
    These are so carbon copy as talking points I almost wonder if you’re being dictated them.

    The war is a catastrophe for Russia. The only thing keeping it going is the pride and political investment of the regime. Even if Putin is succeeded by an extremist it’s very likely one of the first things they do is bring the boys home.
    Indeed.

    Its quite probable this war ends with Putin stepping too close to a window, then his successor ending this misadventure.
    https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/dc6261a8-b72c-4bf7-a2cb-4007324086af
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,031

    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.

    Remember: invading is usually the easy part.

    And it's the occupation that usually kills you.

    Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.

    And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
    And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
    You are joking?

    Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).

    One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
    And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.

    Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.

    You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
    That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s.
    Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,574
    edited June 26

    Labour’s net zero target could cost ‘hundreds of billions’, leaked audio reveals
    Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury’s answers at public event suggest party’s spending could go far beyond public declarations

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/labour-net-zero-plans-hundreds-billions-darren-jones-audio/

    One strange thing about all of this, is it will be using PFI, which was absolutely toxic only a few years ago. The media used to run stories every week about how it cost £300 to change a light bulb or they couldn't mow their own sports field, because a moron from government didn't read the small print of PFI contracts.

    I work in this area and “didn’t read the small print of PFI contracts” is a total mischaracterisation of the issue.
    I was obviously being somewhat facetious. But particular under last Labour government, huge number of PFI deals were signed that were absolutely terrible for the tax payer.
    Not in of their own right. The issue is the gutting of local authority and NHS legal teams and as such the public sector not having any idea what they are entitled to under such contracts, not the contracts themselves in a lot of cases.
    The service elements that many included were one aspect (which is where you get the more stupid stories of £300 to change a light bulb), many turned out horrendously expensive, more pay day lender than mortgage.
    So long as the light bulb was going to require a mobile platform or scaffolding to change, rather than just a now-banned A-frame 20’ ladder, it really doesn’t matter how the bill was getting divvied up.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Implied vote shares from Find Out Now tell us why the result is as it is (not saying wrong)

    Lab 40
    Ref 17
    Con 15
    LD 14
This discussion has been closed.