Sinn Fein are 8/15 with the bookies here . Normally this seat is won in the most marginal way as the unionists only fielded one serious candidate last time to not split the vote . This time it looks like both unionist parties contesting ? Maybe reading this wrong but seems like a Sinn Fein cert (much more so than 8/15) if so
What's your source for indicating two major unionist parties are running ?
Yeah, the DUP aren't standing in F&ST.
The TUV might take some of the unionist vote, and you'd expect Aontu to have a similar effect on the nationalist side - neither stood last time round.
Looks to me like it'll be yet another closely-balanced race, and so the 8/15 odds on SF sound about right.
This is an X-ray of a friend who had their radial head of his bone at the elbow broken by an SUV changing lanes without looking on Trent Bridge in Nottingham in early June, when they had been travelling in separate lanes alongside each other. My friend was crushed by the driver with his Landcruiser against the solid "terrorist barriers" down both sides of the carriageway (not bollards like London), so there is no escape route.
The driver stopped some distance up the road, saw the cyclist get up from the ground, then drove away. Then called the police 25 minutes later, blaming the cyclist for cycling into their vehicle then cycling away. Unfortunately for the lying driver, my friend has proof of events. The healing process will take 3 months.
There's a whole list of issues here, but these questions are not going away whilst action and consequences are so unbalanced across different parties. To list just two:
One is about driver skill and judgement of many given the privilege to drive (remember ~80% say they are 'above average'), especially attempts to deceive.
A second is about Trent Bridge being fail-dangerous not fail-safe - which would be very easy to fix *. We claim to apply "systems safety" to road design, but it does not seem to make it to the actual roads often enough.
And the weirdness keeps coming. Here’s the story of the church
“The chapel of Saint Corentin was rebuilt in 1970 on the ruins of an old chapel dating from the 12th century. According to tradition, Saint Guénolé, too bothered on the mainland by the faithful, decided to take refuge on the island of Seidhun (Sein). He built a priory there, before leaving to found the Abbey of Landévennec. According to the archives, the Abbey of Landévennec provided for several centuries the religious service of the island, which owed it in compensation "150 hake of rent".”
And you think rents in London are high? They paid three figures in hake EVERY YEAR. I’d have thought 80 hake, tops
Surely they could park the ISS somewhere like a Lagrange point or something as all that stuff could be used more usefully than polluting the Pacific? Maybe even as an emergency refuge.
Aren't the Lagrange points higher orbit, so needing boosting upwards? No idea if the now *assembled* station is strong enough.
Plus seems like the only likely ones still need constant corrections (being dynamically unstable) so you need supplies of fuel etc.
So two headlines on the Telegraph website this morning related to political betting and I think they are very different in terms of legality and there is a real danger of conflating the two.
1. Kevin Hollinrake, the business minister, has said he placed a bet on the Conservatives to win the election. I see nothing wrong with this at all. It is not going to influence how hard he tries to secure a Tory victory and I think this should remain legal.
2. Senior Tory ‘bet £8,000 he would lose his seat at election. This to me seems completely wrong and if it is not yet illegal then it should be. It is no different from sportsmen betting on their team to lose.
My fear is that in trying to deal with the second (and the examples of insider knowledge already being invetigated) the new Government will go over the top and ban the first as well.
It depends on the reasons why you think #2 is wrong. Is it wrong because of the position of influence, or because of the position of knowledge?
This all started because of people betting on something they had privileged knowledge of but presumably next to no influence over: the date of the election. If that is wrong then arguments can be made for all insider betting to be wrong.
To use football terms, if you're a player and you know some of the fitness doubts on your side are doing quite well, you can bet on your own team to win because you have information that affects the value of the bet. Guaranteeing a bet will win isn't the only path to a bet being morally dubious.
I'm not offering a view, so don't mistake me for saying this or that should be banned. I don't know. But there are sound reasons why footballers betting, even on their own team to win, is frowned upon. Similar views might be applicable to political betting by insiders.
I think clearly because of position of influence. Whilst no one is going to throw away a Parliamentary career for 8 grand, once you have established the principle then they might do so for, say, 100 grand. This is exactly the same as footballers or cricketers throwing games. Hence the reason I think it should be illegal (if it isn't already)
This is my photograph for the day. Road violence through neglect / carelessness.
This is an X-ray of a friend who had their radial head of his bone at the elbow broken by an SUV changing lanes without looking on Trent Bridge in Nottingham in early June, when they had been travelling in separate lanes alongside each other. My friend was crushed by the driver with his Landcruiser against the solid "terrorist barriers" down both sides of the carriageway (not bollards like London), so there is no escape route.
The driver stopped some distance up the road, saw the cyclist get up from the ground, then drove away. Then called the police 25 minutes later, blaming the cyclist for cycling into their vehicle then cycling away. Unfortunately for the lying driver, my friend has proof of events. The healing process will take 3 months.
There's a whole list of issues here, but these questions are not going away whilst action and consequences are so unbalanced across different parties. To list just three:
One is about driver skill and judgement of many given the privilege to drive (remember ~80% say they are 'above average'), especially attempts to deceive.
A second is about Trent Bridge being fail-dangerous not fail-safe - which would be very easy to fix *. We claim to apply "systems safety" to road design, but it does not seem to make it to the actual roads often enough.
A third is about alternatives to driving being perceived as so difficult that it is perhaps routine to deceive the DVLA about medical status in order to retain a license when it is not safe to do so. Elderly people and eyesight are one example which causes multiple deaths each year.
Sinn Fein are 8/15 with the bookies here . Normally this seat is won in the most marginal way as the unionists only fielded one serious candidate last time to not split the vote . This time it looks like both unionist parties contesting ? Maybe reading this wrong but seems like a Sinn Fein cert (much more so than 8/15) if so
What's your source for indicating two major unionist parties are running ?
Yeah, the DUP aren't standing in F&ST.
The TUV might take some of the unionist vote, and you'd expect Aontu to have a similar effect on the nationalist side - neither stood last time round.
Looks to me like it'll be yet another closely-balanced race, and so the 8/15 odds on SF sound about right.
So two headlines on the Telegraph website this morning related to political betting and I think they are very different in terms of legality and there is a real danger of conflating the two.
1. Kevin Hollinrake, the business minister, has said he placed a bet on the Conservatives to win the election. I see nothing wrong with this at all. It is not going to influence how hard he tries to secure a Tory victory and I think this should remain legal.
2. Senior Tory ‘bet £8,000 he would lose his seat at election. This to me seems completely wrong and if it is not yet illegal then it should be. It is no different from sportsmen betting on their team to lose.
My fear is that in trying to deal with the second (and the examples of insider knowledge already being invetigated) the new Government will go over the top and ban the first as well.
It depends on the reasons why you think #2 is wrong. Is it wrong because of the position of influence, or because of the position of knowledge?
This all started because of people betting on something they had privileged knowledge of but presumably next to no influence over: the date of the election. If that is wrong then arguments can be made for all insider betting to be wrong.
To use football terms, if you're a player and you know some of the fitness doubts on your side are doing quite well, you can bet on your own team to win because you have information that affects the value of the bet. Guaranteeing a bet will win isn't the only path to a bet being morally dubious.
I'm not offering a view, so don't mistake me for saying this or that should be banned. I don't know. But there are sound reasons why footballers betting, even on their own team to win, is frowned upon. Similar views might be applicable to political betting by insiders.
Betting that the team you are playing on is going to lose is where the problem comes.
You may have knowledge that makes the odds wrong but it's the influence you also have that is problematic.
This is an X-ray of a friend who had their radial head of his bone at the elbow broken by an SUV changing lanes without looking on Trent Bridge in Nottingham in early June, when they had been travelling in separate lanes alongside each other. My friend was crushed by the driver with his Landcruiser against the solid "terrorist barriers" down both sides of the carriageway (not bollards like London), so there is no escape route.
The driver stopped some distance up the road, saw the cyclist get up from the ground, then drove away. Then called the police 25 minutes later, blaming the cyclist for cycling into their vehicle then cycling away. Unfortunately for the lying driver, my friend has proof of events. The healing process will take 3 months.
There's a whole list of issues here, but these questions are not going away whilst action and consequences are so unbalanced across different parties. To list just two:
One is about driver skill and judgement of many given the privilege to drive (remember ~80% say they are 'above average'), especially attempts to deceive.
A second is about Trent Bridge being fail-dangerous not fail-safe - which would be very easy to fix *. We claim to apply "systems safety" to road design, but it does not seem to make it to the actual roads often enough.
What proof of events did your friend have, out of interest?
Satellite tracking by GPS showing him stopping and waiting. There is also some CCTV on the bridge which will show movements. If push comes to shove, which is unlikely, there may also be some records in the SUVs self-monitoring data.
How did your Settle-Carlisle trip go? I think it was you?
No what anyone with any brains or who knew a single shred about betting would take. The Tories are 230 - two hundred and thirty - on Betfair Exchange. You are either a mug punter or a garden-variety trollcaster.
Betfair exchange is not Ladbrokes.
Suggest you do your own research before labelling others as trolls?
If you had you might have been able to post something interesting about why Ladbrokes and Betfair odds are so divergent.
My point was simply why anyone in receipt of their senses would take such miserly odds when there are vastly longer ones on offer at a click of a mouse.
Unless they were a) a mug punter or b) using odds to make a spurious 'point' (aka trollcasting).
Because they are not a regular better and when they do bet they do it at a bookies so don't look at online only outlets.
Also Ladbrokes political betting is run (or was run) by a well known poster here. Shadsy, so they might know what they are doing.
Yes, Shadsy indeed "knows what he is doing" by offering pisspoor odds (in this case) to mug punters.
You do know it's always easily possible to find bookies offering shorter odds than the market? That is pretty much the epitome of a mug-punter wager, taking odds shorter than those widely available from other bookies/markets.
Buy Entain shares to put yourself on the winning side of the bet. I think Shadsy is at smarkets now btw.
Bad example to get all agitated about though. The payout is going to be nil whether the odds are 60 or 6 million.
So two headlines on the Telegraph website this morning related to political betting and I think they are very different in terms of legality and there is a real danger of conflating the two.
1. Kevin Hollinrake, the business minister, has said he placed a bet on the Conservatives to win the election. I see nothing wrong with this at all. It is not going to influence how hard he tries to secure a Tory victory and I think this should remain legal.
2. Senior Tory ‘bet £8,000 he would lose his seat at election. This to me seems completely wrong and if it is not yet illegal then it should be. It is no different from sportsmen betting on their team to lose.
My fear is that in trying to deal with the second (and the examples of insider knowledge already being invetigated) the new Government will go over the top and ban the first as well.
It depends on the reasons why you think #2 is wrong. Is it wrong because of the position of influence, or because of the position of knowledge?
This all started because of people betting on something they had privileged knowledge of but presumably next to no influence over: the date of the election. If that is wrong then arguments can be made for all insider betting to be wrong.
To use football terms, if you're a player and you know some of the fitness doubts on your side are doing quite well, you can bet on your own team to win because you have information that affects the value of the bet. Guaranteeing a bet will win isn't the only path to a bet being morally dubious.
I'm not offering a view, so don't mistake me for saying this or that should be banned. I don't know. But there are sound reasons why footballers betting, even on their own team to win, is frowned upon. Similar views might be applicable to political betting by insiders.
Betting that the team you are playing on is going to lose is where the problem comes.
You may have knowledge that makes the odds wrong but it's the influence you also have that is problematic.
I understand that betting on your own team in football is also against league rules. Do you think that should change?
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
I'm setting up a watch party/shitposting group for some politically-inclined friends and thinking of some talking points, side plots, seats to watch and maybe a bingo card. From the top of my head, the main things are:
* scale of defeat * allied to these, notable scalps * Gorgeous and Corbz * SNP collapse? * The Farage Ascendency * Greens - better in the shires or the cities? * The Vaz madness in Leicester * Effect (if any) of 'personal votes' * Shameless Con leadership manoeuvring * Alliance in NI
There will be a lot to chat on through the night. Anything anyone else has a particular eye on, or other interesting mini dramas?
Ashfield, with the Ashfield Independents, and Lee Anderson for RFM, is a seat to watch (though maybe that's included in your Farage Ascendancy?)
Particular things you might want to keep an eye on, depending on the interest in your group, is whether the Tories are wiped out in particular areas: Wales, Scotland, North West, etc, or seats with Premier League football grounds, County Cricket grounds, Warhammer stores, etc.
I'm going to look up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds). I also want to keep a running total of the area of seats won - will Labour reach a majority by constituency land area?
Looking up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds) strikes me as a cheerfully pointless endeavour. Fully on board with that. My guess is that the main grounds are largely Lab now and will become possibly solely Lab; but that the outgrounds favour the Tories.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess). Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby. Very much looking forward to this...
Today's photo is a screenshot from the Post Office Inquiry - I flicked over for 2 seconds and saw this..
The important thing here is that remember this is a banking system - if what is written in that email doesn't scare you enough to resign immediately nothing will...
So, I was out last night and didn't see the debate or PB comments - was there a consensus on what happened? Any light or just heat?
The Yougov snap poll had it tied but 85% of 2019 Tories said Sunak won so the polls likely narrow a bit by next week
Earlier you said nearly 90%, now you say 85%, and both times you are wrong. How do you do it?
78% of (undecided?) 2019 Tories said Sunak won, which is 82% when excluding don't knows.
Even if only 80% that would equate to 34% voteshare overall for the Tories if all the 2019 Conservatives who thought Sunak won last night voted Tory next week.
Even if they don't all do that, it still likely gets the Tories nearer to 30% than 20%
I know! It makes the exaggeration of the figures even more barmy.
So two headlines on the Telegraph website this morning related to political betting and I think they are very different in terms of legality and there is a real danger of conflating the two.
1. Kevin Hollinrake, the business minister, has said he placed a bet on the Conservatives to win the election. I see nothing wrong with this at all. It is not going to influence how hard he tries to secure a Tory victory and I think this should remain legal.
2. Senior Tory ‘bet £8,000 he would lose his seat at election. This to me seems completely wrong and if it is not yet illegal then it should be. It is no different from sportsmen betting on their team to lose.
My fear is that in trying to deal with the second (and the examples of insider knowledge already being invetigated) the new Government will go over the top and ban the first as well.
It depends on the reasons why you think #2 is wrong. Is it wrong because of the position of influence, or because of the position of knowledge?
This all started because of people betting on something they had privileged knowledge of but presumably next to no influence over: the date of the election. If that is wrong then arguments can be made for all insider betting to be wrong.
To use football terms, if you're a player and you know some of the fitness doubts on your side are doing quite well, you can bet on your own team to win because you have information that affects the value of the bet. Guaranteeing a bet will win isn't the only path to a bet being morally dubious.
I'm not offering a view, so don't mistake me for saying this or that should be banned. I don't know. But there are sound reasons why footballers betting, even on their own team to win, is frowned upon. Similar views might be applicable to political betting by insiders.
I think clearly because of position of influence. Whilst no one is going to throw away a Parliamentary career for 8 grand, once you have established the principle then they might do so for, say, 100 grand. This is exactly the same as footballers or cricketers throwing games. Hence the reason I think it should be illegal (if it isn't already)
If you want honest, non-money-grubbing MPs then it's better if people who would throw their reelection for 100K have an opportunity to do that.
No what anyone with any brains or who knew a single shred about betting would take. The Tories are 230 - two hundred and thirty - on Betfair Exchange. You are either a mug punter or a garden-variety trollcaster.
Betfair exchange is not Ladbrokes.
Suggest you do your own research before labelling others as trolls?
If you had you might have been able to post something interesting about why Ladbrokes and Betfair odds are so divergent.
My point was simply why anyone in receipt of their senses would take such miserly odds when there are vastly longer ones on offer at a click of a mouse.
Unless they were a) a mug punter or b) using odds to make a spurious 'point' (aka trollcasting).
Because they are not a regular better and when they do bet they do it at a bookies so don't look at online only outlets.
Also Ladbrokes political betting is run (or was run) by a well known poster here. Shadsy, so they might know what they are doing.
Yes, Shadsy indeed "knows what he is doing" by offering pisspoor odds (in this case) to mug punters.
You do know it's always easily possible to find bookies offering shorter odds than the market? That is pretty much the epitome of a mug-punter wager, taking odds shorter than those widely available from other bookies/markets.
On the other hand there is a lot to be said for an anonymous cash paid bet with a betting slip at Ladbrokes rather than through an online account. Even if the odds are lower.
Today's photo is a screenshot from the Post Office Inquiry - I flicked over for 2 seconds and saw this..
The important thing here is that remember this is a banking system - if what is written in that email doesn't scare you enough to resign immediately nothing will...
The first para - I can't make sense of it. The writer says 'here are some examples of X' but then says 'we are not suggesting that X has happened'. Eh??
Surely they could park the ISS somewhere like a Lagrange point or something as all that stuff could be used more usefully than polluting the Pacific? Maybe even as an emergency refuge.
Well they’re not going to get Boeing to do it, after all the crap that company is currently giving NASA.
The problem is that it will rapidly degrade and start to disintegrate once systems start being switched off, so it needs to be either pushed deep into space or brought back to Earth.
So two headlines on the Telegraph website this morning related to political betting and I think they are very different in terms of legality and there is a real danger of conflating the two.
1. Kevin Hollinrake, the business minister, has said he placed a bet on the Conservatives to win the election. I see nothing wrong with this at all. It is not going to influence how hard he tries to secure a Tory victory and I think this should remain legal.
2. Senior Tory ‘bet £8,000 he would lose his seat at election. This to me seems completely wrong and if it is not yet illegal then it should be. It is no different from sportsmen betting on their team to lose.
My fear is that in trying to deal with the second (and the examples of insider knowledge already being invetigated) the new Government will go over the top and ban the first as well.
It depends on the reasons why you think #2 is wrong. Is it wrong because of the position of influence, or because of the position of knowledge?
This all started because of people betting on something they had privileged knowledge of but presumably next to no influence over: the date of the election. If that is wrong then arguments can be made for all insider betting to be wrong.
To use football terms, if you're a player and you know some of the fitness doubts on your side are doing quite well, you can bet on your own team to win because you have information that affects the value of the bet. Guaranteeing a bet will win isn't the only path to a bet being morally dubious.
I'm not offering a view, so don't mistake me for saying this or that should be banned. I don't know. But there are sound reasons why footballers betting, even on their own team to win, is frowned upon. Similar views might be applicable to political betting by insiders.
Betting that the team you are playing on is going to lose is where the problem comes.
You may have knowledge that makes the odds wrong but it's the influence you also have that is problematic.
I understand that betting on your own team in football is also against league rules. Do you think that should change?
Nope because it shifts things from knowledge of the likely result to potential influencing the result.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
So, I was out last night and didn't see the debate or PB comments - was there a consensus on what happened? Any light or just heat?
The Yougov snap poll had it tied but 85% of 2019 Tories said Sunak won so the polls likely narrow a bit by next week
Earlier you said nearly 90%, now you say 85%, and both times you are wrong. How do you do it?
78% of (undecided?) 2019 Tories said Sunak won, which is 82% when excluding don't knows.
Even if only 80% that would equate to 34% voteshare overall for the Tories if all the 2019 Conservatives who thought Sunak won last night voted Tory next week.
Even if they don't all do that, it still likely gets the Tories nearer to 30% than 20%
I know! It makes the exaggeration of the figures even more barmy.
But only 3 million watched, not all 2019 Con voters
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Labour will not give up MPs to influence who the opposition is. Forget it, it's fantasy politics.
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
I'm setting up a watch party/shitposting group for some politically-inclined friends and thinking of some talking points, side plots, seats to watch and maybe a bingo card. From the top of my head, the main things are:
* scale of defeat * allied to these, notable scalps * Gorgeous and Corbz * SNP collapse? * The Farage Ascendency * Greens - better in the shires or the cities? * The Vaz madness in Leicester * Effect (if any) of 'personal votes' * Shameless Con leadership manoeuvring * Alliance in NI
There will be a lot to chat on through the night. Anything anyone else has a particular eye on, or other interesting mini dramas?
Ashfield, with the Ashfield Independents, and Lee Anderson for RFM, is a seat to watch (though maybe that's included in your Farage Ascendancy?)
Particular things you might want to keep an eye on, depending on the interest in your group, is whether the Tories are wiped out in particular areas: Wales, Scotland, North West, etc, or seats with Premier League football grounds, County Cricket grounds, Warhammer stores, etc.
I'm going to look up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds). I also want to keep a running total of the area of seats won - will Labour reach a majority by constituency land area?
Looking up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds) strikes me as a cheerfully pointless endeavour. Fully on board with that. My guess is that the main grounds are largely Lab now and will become possibly solely Lab; but that the outgrounds favour the Tories.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess). Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby. Very much looking forward to this...
Derbyshire are whatever Derby seat the County Ground is in, and Chesterfield where Queens Park is for an outground - but Chesterfield is already Labour.
My impression of Ashfield is that it will be close-run between Lee Anderson and Labour.
Zadrozny is now out to 8:1 having started at 4s and 5s.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
DUP would want their time in Parliament and won't have that if they merge
And the Lib Dems would be after the centralist Labour MPs who are likely to do well under and like Starmer.
Surely they could park the ISS somewhere like a Lagrange point or something as all that stuff could be used more usefully than polluting the Pacific? Maybe even as an emergency refuge.
Well they’re not going to get Boeing to do it, after all the crap that company is currently giving NASA.
The problem is that it will rapidly degrade and start to disintegrate once systems start being switched off, so it needs to be either pushed deep into space or brought back to Earth.
and bringing it back to earth is the easier option.
Got to say it was one of those things were you look at the contract and think - well there is no-one else in any fit state to deal with the work required.
Or join Reform. Nige would welcome him. And Portillo. If he wants to stop the train rides and travel. Be a MP again Mike. I do not think so. Hang out with boys on GB news and invite Andrew Meil over from Paris who is still waiting to interview Bojo. His old mate from The Spectator.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
I wasn't sure about this, but it sounds interesting.
A clear political gain for Lab and Lib, and Tories more thoroughly buried. Hmmm.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Labour will not give up MPs to influence who the opposition is. Forget it, it's fantasy politics.
This dosent feel like 1997. It feels like Majors exhausted and despised party of 1997 up against Kinnocks disliked Labour of 1992 and the SDP of 1983 performing Reforms disruptor role.
Feel is important in an election. In 1997 it was obvious Labour were whupping the Tories. You could taste it. In 2010? The Tories would have won that had we not had the Cleggasm. In the 2015 Stockton South campaign the wheel had fallen off the Labour bus weeks before polling day with fractious infighting within the camp. And with door after door saying they liked our candidate but feared Alex Salmond, we knew in our guts it wasn't going well. 2017? I co-authored and strategised Dr Paul Williams winning campaign. No infighting as we simply shut the party out, and won.
This time? I'm telling you, there is something in the air which the pollsters aren't picking up at least here in the true North East. That isn't me confidently saying we will win. But we're in the battle and getting heard and picking up support.
We know how the Tories feel. They feel that they are heading for the cliffs. Sunak out campaigning in seats they hold by 25k, kids with crayons running the social media campaign, and coming out swinging in the debates hoping desperately to land a punch on Penfold...
It feels the same here in Dorset but... the 'reluctantly going to vote Tory' voices on here make me think it will end up disappointingly much closer than the polls suggest.
just observer bias imho- On a site like this you get lots of "tories" - by definition they are politicly engaged (why would they be on the site if not) and therefore will at some point be angry with whats happened either by the government or by the campaign - Of this mass a lot will then not vote tory again but probably then dont feel the need to admit who they are going to vote for instead but some out of the mass will state they are "reluctantly " going to vote tory. Nothing that contradicts the polls ,indeed supports them , otherwise the tories would be on zero percent .
I for instance have voted tory at all general elections but will this time vote Reform .
I have a moral dilemma here. I have two votes. Two postal votes. One for me and one for my ex wife (who is now in distant parts and doesn’t care)
How shall I cast them? I am torn between starmer (to give him a chance and annoy @kinabalu) and Reform (I want the Tories destroyed and every vote for Reform adds to that)
However my two vote sitch seems to solve the dilemma. I shall personally vote for Starmer but my ex wife will vote Reform. Sorted
You don't have 2 votes. You have 1. It is a crime to use your ex wife's vote. Not likely to get caught, but you have admitted it here and voter fraud is usually harshly punished.
How do you sign the cover document? My postal vote was refused In May because my signature didn’t match that originally submitted.
My wife is disturbingly good at forging signatures and other handwriting, a skill developed over years of signing her school homework book in the name of her mother at her mother's direction.
Not that I don't trust her or anything, but I did complete my postal vote while she was still in bed, just to remove any temptation.
It's harder when you don't have a copy of the specimen signature in front of you, of course.
Given that this seems to be the area of voting which does actually see a noticeable level of fraud, it's an obvious target for improvement in the future.
My problem is that I have, and have had fairly radical treatment for, cervical myelopathy, which has, of course, affected many of my muscles below my neck, especially my hands. Writing anything is exceedingly difficult, and I have to have several ‘goes’ at a signature before it’s recognisable as my name.
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
I'm setting up a watch party/shitposting group for some politically-inclined friends and thinking of some talking points, side plots, seats to watch and maybe a bingo card. From the top of my head, the main things are:
* scale of defeat * allied to these, notable scalps * Gorgeous and Corbz * SNP collapse? * The Farage Ascendency * Greens - better in the shires or the cities? * The Vaz madness in Leicester * Effect (if any) of 'personal votes' * Shameless Con leadership manoeuvring * Alliance in NI
There will be a lot to chat on through the night. Anything anyone else has a particular eye on, or other interesting mini dramas?
Ashfield, with the Ashfield Independents, and Lee Anderson for RFM, is a seat to watch (though maybe that's included in your Farage Ascendancy?)
Particular things you might want to keep an eye on, depending on the interest in your group, is whether the Tories are wiped out in particular areas: Wales, Scotland, North West, etc, or seats with Premier League football grounds, County Cricket grounds, Warhammer stores, etc.
I'm going to look up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds). I also want to keep a running total of the area of seats won - will Labour reach a majority by constituency land area?
Looking up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds) strikes me as a cheerfully pointless endeavour. Fully on board with that. My guess is that the main grounds are largely Lab now and will become possibly solely Lab; but that the outgrounds favour the Tories.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess). Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby. Very much looking forward to this...
Derbyshire are whatever Derby seat the County Ground is in, and Chesterfield where Queens Park is for an outground - but Chesterfield is already Labour.
My impression of Ashfield is that it will be close-run between Lee Anderson and Labour.
Zadrozny is now out to 8:1 having started at 4s and 5s.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Labour will not give up MPs to influence who the opposition is. Forget it, it's fantasy politics.
In time it's not impossible to imagine leftish Labour MPs finding the LibDems more palatable. Remember Blair and Iraq. Stuff happens. And, informally, Lab leadership might not be too unhappy if it deprives Tories of oxygen. After all, they likely will be able to spare a few MPs.
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
Farage losing in Clacton has to top any wishlist.
With an ideal result being Farage comes third (again!) which is why I'm so annoyed Labour have pulled their candidate as it seemed quite plausible until then.
In Clacton some ex Labour voters will vote for Farage
TBH I think Farage being elected into an actual job, where he's expected to do things like casework and other boring stuff, might actually shoot his fox.
Plenty of MPs simply don't do the day to day stuff. I've seen my MP in public once in the last Parliament - People complain about his response to their requests on facebook, but ultimately it's only a tiny % who ever contact an MP. He may well be busy with constituency work but I don't think many people notice either way, and he's going to be in with a much bigger majority this time around whatever he did.
Farage is probably the political figure with the biggest personal following in the country. I'd imagine the people voting for him in Clacton will be more happy that he's prominent nationally, rather than noticing if he visited a local charity, or helped Bob with his Council tax problems.
I built up Labour support in Broxtowe from to -9891 to -389 from 1992 to 2010 (winning in 1997, 2001 and 2005), with similar national results in 1992 and 2010; this was mainly due to constituency work and I was never prominent nationally. There was an awful lot of detailed work involved, as well as general political argument. So it can be done, but it's obviously easier to cut a dash with nationally-recognised flourishes.
Today's photo is a screenshot from the Post Office Inquiry - I flicked over for 2 seconds and saw this..
The important thing here is that remember this is a banking system - if what is written in that email doesn't scare you enough to resign immediately nothing will...
The first para - I can't make sense of it. The writer says 'here are some examples of X' but then says 'we are not suggesting that X has happened'. Eh??
Didn't any of these people stop and think: "hmmm... what about all those postmasters who are being prosecuted for cash on hand discrepancies?'
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
I'm setting up a watch party/shitposting group for some politically-inclined friends and thinking of some talking points, side plots, seats to watch and maybe a bingo card. From the top of my head, the main things are:
* scale of defeat * allied to these, notable scalps * Gorgeous and Corbz * SNP collapse? * The Farage Ascendency * Greens - better in the shires or the cities? * The Vaz madness in Leicester * Effect (if any) of 'personal votes' * Shameless Con leadership manoeuvring * Alliance in NI
There will be a lot to chat on through the night. Anything anyone else has a particular eye on, or other interesting mini dramas?
Ashfield, with the Ashfield Independents, and Lee Anderson for RFM, is a seat to watch (though maybe that's included in your Farage Ascendancy?)
Particular things you might want to keep an eye on, depending on the interest in your group, is whether the Tories are wiped out in particular areas: Wales, Scotland, North West, etc, or seats with Premier League football grounds, County Cricket grounds, Warhammer stores, etc.
I'm going to look up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds). I also want to keep a running total of the area of seats won - will Labour reach a majority by constituency land area?
Looking up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds) strikes me as a cheerfully pointless endeavour. Fully on board with that. My guess is that the main grounds are largely Lab now and will become possibly solely Lab; but that the outgrounds favour the Tories.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess). Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby. Very much looking forward to this...
Derbyshire are whatever Derby seat the County Ground is in, and Chesterfield where Queens Park is for an outground - but Chesterfield is already Labour.
My impression of Ashfield is that it will be close-run between Lee Anderson and Labour.
Zadrozny is now out to 8:1 having started at 4s and 5s.
So two headlines on the Telegraph website this morning related to political betting and I think they are very different in terms of legality and there is a real danger of conflating the two.
1. Kevin Hollinrake, the business minister, has said he placed a bet on the Conservatives to win the election. I see nothing wrong with this at all. It is not going to influence how hard he tries to secure a Tory victory and I think this should remain legal.
2. Senior Tory ‘bet £8,000 he would lose his seat at election. This to me seems completely wrong and if it is not yet illegal then it should be. It is no different from sportsmen betting on their team to lose.
My fear is that in trying to deal with the second (and the examples of insider knowledge already being invetigated) the new Government will go over the top and ban the first as well.
It depends on the reasons why you think #2 is wrong. Is it wrong because of the position of influence, or because of the position of knowledge?
This all started because of people betting on something they had privileged knowledge of but presumably next to no influence over: the date of the election. If that is wrong then arguments can be made for all insider betting to be wrong.
To use football terms, if you're a player and you know some of the fitness doubts on your side are doing quite well, you can bet on your own team to win because you have information that affects the value of the bet. Guaranteeing a bet will win isn't the only path to a bet being morally dubious.
I'm not offering a view, so don't mistake me for saying this or that should be banned. I don't know. But there are sound reasons why footballers betting, even on their own team to win, is frowned upon. Similar views might be applicable to political betting by insiders.
Betting that the team you are playing on is going to lose is where the problem comes.
You may have knowledge that makes the odds wrong but it's the influence you also have that is problematic.
I understand that betting on your own team in football is also against league rules. Do you think that should change?
Perversely if you own a PL team and a massive betting consultancy you may...
Today's photo is a screenshot from the Post Office Inquiry - I flicked over for 2 seconds and saw this..
The important thing here is that remember this is a banking system - if what is written in that email doesn't scare you enough to resign immediately nothing will...
The first para - I can't make sense of it. The writer says 'here are some examples of X' but then says 'we are not suggesting that X has happened'. Eh??
I think what they are trying to say is "we copied them more than once to the audit server", "we don't think there are duplicates on the original server"
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Labour will not give up MPs to influence who the opposition is. Forget it, it's fantasy politics.
In time it's not impossible to imagine leftish Labour MPs finding the LibDems more palatable. Remember Blair and Iraq. Stuff happens. And, informally, Lab leadership might not be too unhappy if it deprives Tories of oxygen. After all, they likely will be able to spare a few MPs.
Sounds plausible. Let's sketch out how that process might be playing out:
2010: I'm going to join the Labour Party! 2015: I'm now heavily involved in campaigning! 2017: I'm now a Labour councillor! 2019: I stood for parliament for Labour but lost. 2024 (early July): I stood for parliament for Labour and won! 2024 (mid July): I suddenly remembered about Iraq and crossed the floor to join the Lib Dems
Sinn Fein are 8/15 with the bookies here . Normally this seat is won in the most marginal way as the unionists only fielded one serious candidate last time to not split the vote . This time it looks like both unionist parties contesting ? Maybe reading this wrong but seems like a Sinn Fein cert (much more so than 8/15) if so
What's your source for indicating two major unionist parties are running ?
Yeah, the DUP aren't standing in F&ST.
The TUV might take some of the unionist vote, and you'd expect Aontu to have a similar effect on the nationalist side - neither stood last time round.
Looks to me like it'll be yet another closely-balanced race, and so the 8/15 odds on SF sound about right.
Surely they could park the ISS somewhere like a Lagrange point or something as all that stuff could be used more usefully than polluting the Pacific? Maybe even as an emergency refuge.
Well they’re not going to get Boeing to do it, after all the crap that company is currently giving NASA.
The problem is that it will rapidly degrade and start to disintegrate once systems start being switched off, so it needs to be either pushed deep into space or brought back to Earth.
Today's photo is a screenshot from the Post Office Inquiry - I flicked over for 2 seconds and saw this..
The important thing here is that remember this is a banking system - if what is written in that email doesn't scare you enough to resign immediately nothing will...
The first para - I can't make sense of it. The writer says 'here are some examples of X' but then says 'we are not suggesting that X has happened'. Eh??
It makes sense if you understand that there is zero chance of the copy being wrong but you can't admit as much. Sentence 1 says we have a massive problem. Sentence 2 is bullshit to cover the problem mentioned in sentence 1
Fantasy politics.The Tories get 200. Lib Dems get 150. Clegg leaves Facebook and is the new leader even though Libs on 150. Cameron becomes the vice. They all go for a pre goverment bonding session at Clarksons farm. Is on his way to join his the new party is his X reg XJS. It breaks down on the A40. His AA membership has expired. He walks across the fields and finds a pub and gets pissed.
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
Farage losing in Clacton has to top any wishlist.
With an ideal result being Farage comes third (again!) which is why I'm so annoyed Labour have pulled their candidate as it seemed quite plausible until then.
In Clacton some ex Labour voters will vote for Farage
TBH I think Farage being elected into an actual job, where he's expected to do things like casework and other boring stuff, might actually shoot his fox.
Yeah. I hope he wins and wins well. Partly because he triggers the right people and partly because he's a grifter who, if he had to do this, I think will come up pretty short pretty quickly and he would be under the microscope all of the time and won't enjoy it one bit.
The more of an 'insider' he is, the worse he'll do. And while he is unquestionably a very effective campaigner, his flaw is his surprisingly thin skin. You're right that he will not like scrutiny at all.
This is my photograph for the day. Road violence through neglect / carelessness.
This is an X-ray of a friend who had their radial head of his bone at the elbow broken by an SUV changing lanes without looking on Trent Bridge in Nottingham in early June, when they had been travelling in separate lanes alongside each other. My friend was crushed by the driver with his Landcruiser against the solid "terrorist barriers" down both sides of the carriageway (not bollards like London), so there is no escape route.
The driver stopped some distance up the road, saw the cyclist get up from the ground, then drove away. Then called the police 25 minutes later, blaming the cyclist for cycling into their vehicle then cycling away. Unfortunately for the lying driver, my friend has proof of events. The healing process will take 3 months.
There's a whole list of issues here, but these questions are not going away whilst action and consequences are so unbalanced across different parties. To list just three:
One is about driver skill and judgement of many given the privilege to drive (remember ~80% say they are 'above average'), especially attempts to deceive.
A second is about Trent Bridge being fail-dangerous not fail-safe - which would be very easy to fix *. We claim to apply "systems safety" to road design, but it does not seem to make it to the actual roads often enough.
A third is about alternatives to driving being perceived as so difficult that it is perhaps routine to deceive the DVLA about medical status in order to retain a license when it is not safe to do so. Elderly people and eyesight are one example which causes multiple deaths each year.
That bridge is bad enough in a car let alone on a bike. The anti-terror barriers have seriously reduced the width of the road but they have still maintained the same number of lanes, just made them incredibly tight. It really is a terrible piece of design.
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
I'm setting up a watch party/shitposting group for some politically-inclined friends and thinking of some talking points, side plots, seats to watch and maybe a bingo card. From the top of my head, the main things are:
* scale of defeat * allied to these, notable scalps * Gorgeous and Corbz * SNP collapse? * The Farage Ascendency * Greens - better in the shires or the cities? * The Vaz madness in Leicester * Effect (if any) of 'personal votes' * Shameless Con leadership manoeuvring * Alliance in NI
There will be a lot to chat on through the night. Anything anyone else has a particular eye on, or other interesting mini dramas?
Ashfield, with the Ashfield Independents, and Lee Anderson for RFM, is a seat to watch (though maybe that's included in your Farage Ascendancy?)
Particular things you might want to keep an eye on, depending on the interest in your group, is whether the Tories are wiped out in particular areas: Wales, Scotland, North West, etc, or seats with Premier League football grounds, County Cricket grounds, Warhammer stores, etc.
I'm going to look up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds). I also want to keep a running total of the area of seats won - will Labour reach a majority by constituency land area?
Looking up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds) strikes me as a cheerfully pointless endeavour. Fully on board with that. My guess is that the main grounds are largely Lab now and will become possibly solely Lab; but that the outgrounds favour the Tories.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess). Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby. Very much looking forward to this...
Derbyshire are whatever Derby seat the County Ground is in, and Chesterfield where Queens Park is for an outground - but Chesterfield is already Labour.
My impression of Ashfield is that it will be close-run between Lee Anderson and Labour.
Zadrozny is now out to 8:1 having started at 4s and 5s.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Yes, we've talked about this a bit. It will be down to the Speaker to adjudicate. Much potential for all sorts of things to affect it - by-elections, defections, coalitions, perhaps His Majesty's Very Loyal Opposition, if a bunch of Labour backbenchers decided there is more room on the other side of the chamber (though that would be high levels of skulduggery, if they took up the Labour whip again in time to be candidates at the election following).
The Lib Dems would, I'd think, be concentrating on winning the seats to make it a necessary question to answer, and the Tories seem to be preoccupied with internal post-election manoeuvring.
Farage is a fucking idiot. He would now - I am sure - be well ahead of the Tories if he hadn’t vomited up his foolishness about Putin
The people are desperate for alternative to the Tories AND Labour - but they’re not gonna vote for a party that thinks “Hitler had his reasons”
Funny how election campaigns always cause politicians to say stupid things that damage their own position, such as Starmer yesterday with his Bangladesh comments.
Looking up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds) strikes me as a cheerfully pointless endeavour. Fully on board with that. My guess is that the main grounds are largely Lab now and will become possibly solely Lab; but that the outgrounds favour the Tories.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess). Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby. Very much looking forward to this...
Hampshire's Rose Bowl is in Eastleigh rather than either of the Southampton seats - so presumably Lib Dem gain from Conservative?
The Oval (Surrey) is (and always has been) Labour (prev Vauxhall, now Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) - but Surrey's outground at Guildford will also (presumably) be a Lib Dem gain from Conservative...
Even down at 36% that's still a 230 majority. LDs also the OO on that poll, even if CorRef merge...
Con 56, Lab 440, LD 82, Ref 22, Green 4, SNP 23, PC 4, Others 19
I'm still scratching my head at the ludicrous Green shares some pollsters persist in publishing. And this one is up two. Something is happening with the Green party. It's odd, they've had virtually no coverage yet there they are.
LLG is up 3 and RefCon down 2 in that poll. LLG 59, RefCon 35. So despite looking very different from other pollsters on individual parties it's bang on average on a left vs right basis.
This is my photograph for the day. Road violence through neglect / carelessness.
This is an X-ray of a friend who had their radial head of his bone at the elbow broken by an SUV changing lanes without looking on Trent Bridge in Nottingham in early June, when they had been travelling in separate lanes alongside each other. My friend was crushed by the driver with his Landcruiser against the solid "terrorist barriers" down both sides of the carriageway (not bollards like London), so there is no escape route.
The driver stopped some distance up the road, saw the cyclist get up from the ground, then drove away. Then called the police 25 minutes later, blaming the cyclist for cycling into their vehicle then cycling away. Unfortunately for the lying driver, my friend has proof of events. The healing process will take 3 months.
There's a whole list of issues here, but these questions are not going away whilst action and consequences are so unbalanced across different parties. To list just three:
One is about driver skill and judgement of many given the privilege to drive (remember ~80% say they are 'above average'), especially attempts to deceive.
A second is about Trent Bridge being fail-dangerous not fail-safe - which would be very easy to fix *. We claim to apply "systems safety" to road design, but it does not seem to make it to the actual roads often enough.
A third is about alternatives to driving being perceived as so difficult that it is perhaps routine to deceive the DVLA about medical status in order to retain a license when it is not safe to do so. Elderly people and eyesight are one example which causes multiple deaths each year.
Yuk. Not many good options for crossing the river by bike around there.
Yep - permissive foot/cycle bridge 600m one way. Dangerous Lady Bay bridge 600m the other way, with no footways whatsoever, as used in Smiley's People. I'm sure you know that a ped/cycle bridge is going up another 400m beyond the Lady Bay bridge, but that's not designed for volume.
I think the solid barriers are to do with police and football crowd control, but it needs a better answer. It has 6 traffic lanes for ~35k AADT, which is difficult to defend in the context.
The answer will involve I think initially taking one lane as 2-way cycling to the other side of the barriers, and in due course one lane for a tram track. Or something more radical. Extra politics as it is a County managed road.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Yes, we've talked about this a bit. It will be down to the Speaker to adjudicate. Much potential for all sorts of things to affect it - by-elections, defections, coalitions, perhaps His Majesty's Very Loyal Opposition, if a bunch of Labour backbenchers decided there is more room on the other side of the chamber (though that would be high levels of skulduggery, if they took up the Labour whip again in time to be candidates at the election following).
The Lib Dems would, I'd think, be concentrating on winning the seats to make it a necessary question to answer, and the Tories seem to be preoccupied with internal post-election manoeuvring.
No, the Tories are going to be in the intensive care unit or a secure psych ward. Seriously. If these polls verify they will so shocked and traumatised it will take money months for them to return to “normality” - and indeed they might not do so
Some of these polls put them on about 30 seats and behind the Lib Dems, with Farage chortling at them in the Commons
Even down at 36% that's still a 230 majority. LDs also the OO on that poll, even if CorRef merge...
Con 56, Lab 440, LD 82, Ref 22, Green 4, SNP 23, PC 4, Others 19
Starmer on course for a lower share of the vote than Dave.
Dave is the best LOTO this century.
For sure.
Sadly, he screwed up royally as PM and let the country down badly as a result.
I would pin the blame on Osbourne who screwed up the 2015 by being too successfully winning too many seats and destroying the Lib Dems - which meant the that Brexit referendum that was there to win a few votes couldn't be binned as part of the coalition 2 discussions.
Even down at 36% that's still a 230 majority. LDs also the OO on that poll, even if CorRef merge...
Con 56, Lab 440, LD 82, Ref 22, Green 4, SNP 23, PC 4, Others 19
I'm still scratching my head at the ludicrous Green shares some pollsters persist in publishing. And this one is up two. Something is happening with the Green party. It's odd, they've had virtually no coverage yet there they are.
LLG is up 3 and RefCon down 2 in that poll. LLG 59, RefCon 35. So despite looking very different from other pollsters on individual parties it's bang on average on a left vs right basis.
There is a serious chance we will surprise everyone.
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
Farage losing in Clacton has to top any wishlist.
With an ideal result being Farage comes third (again!) which is why I'm so annoyed Labour have pulled their candidate as it seemed quite plausible until then.
In Clacton some ex Labour voters will vote for Farage
TBH I think Farage being elected into an actual job, where he's expected to do things like casework and other boring stuff, might actually shoot his fox.
Plenty of MPs simply don't do the day to day stuff. I've seen my MP in public once in the last Parliament - People complain about his response to their requests on facebook, but ultimately it's only a tiny % who ever contact an MP. He may well be busy with constituency work but I don't think many people notice either way, and he's going to be in with a much bigger majority this time around whatever he did.
Farage is probably the political figure with the biggest personal following in the country. I'd imagine the people voting for him in Clacton will be more happy that he's prominent nationally, rather than noticing if he visited a local charity, or helped Bob with his Council tax problems.
I built up Labour support in Broxtowe from to -9891 to -389 from 1992 to 2010 (winning in 1997, 2001 and 2005), with similar national results in 1992 and 2010; this was mainly due to constituency work and I was never prominent nationally. There was an awful lot of detailed work involved, as well as general political argument. So it can be done, but it's obviously easier to cut a dash with nationally-recognised flourishes.
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
I'm setting up a watch party/shitposting group for some politically-inclined friends and thinking of some talking points, side plots, seats to watch and maybe a bingo card. From the top of my head, the main things are:
* scale of defeat * allied to these, notable scalps * Gorgeous and Corbz * SNP collapse? * The Farage Ascendency * Greens - better in the shires or the cities? * The Vaz madness in Leicester * Effect (if any) of 'personal votes' * Shameless Con leadership manoeuvring * Alliance in NI
There will be a lot to chat on through the night. Anything anyone else has a particular eye on, or other interesting mini dramas?
Ashfield, with the Ashfield Independents, and Lee Anderson for RFM, is a seat to watch (though maybe that's included in your Farage Ascendancy?)
Particular things you might want to keep an eye on, depending on the interest in your group, is whether the Tories are wiped out in particular areas: Wales, Scotland, North West, etc, or seats with Premier League football grounds, County Cricket grounds, Warhammer stores, etc.
I'm going to look up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds). I also want to keep a running total of the area of seats won - will Labour reach a majority by constituency land area?
Looking up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds) strikes me as a cheerfully pointless endeavour. Fully on board with that. My guess is that the main grounds are largely Lab now and will become possibly solely Lab; but that the outgrounds favour the Tories.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess). Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby. Very much looking forward to this...
Derbyshire are whatever Derby seat the County Ground is in, and Chesterfield where Queens Park is for an outground - but Chesterfield is already Labour.
My impression of Ashfield is that it will be close-run between Lee Anderson and Labour.
Zadrozny is now out to 8:1 having started at 4s and 5s.
Even down at 36% that's still a 230 majority. LDs also the OO on that poll, even if CorRef merge...
Con 56, Lab 440, LD 82, Ref 22, Green 4, SNP 23, PC 4, Others 19
I'm still scratching my head at the ludicrous Green shares some pollsters persist in publishing. And this one is up two. Something is happening with the Green party. It's odd, they've had virtually no coverage yet there they are.
LLG is up 3 and RefCon down 2 in that poll. LLG 59, RefCon 35. So despite looking very different from other pollsters on individual parties it's bang on average on a left vs right basis.
It's not that odd - Labour look like the winner so left wing voters are thinking - we don't need to vote Labour and can vote for the party we really want.
Although I look at the Green policies and ask where are the actual ecology policies?
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Yes, we've talked about this a bit. It will be down to the Speaker to adjudicate. Much potential for all sorts of things to affect it - by-elections, defections, coalitions, perhaps His Majesty's Very Loyal Opposition, if a bunch of Labour backbenchers decided there is more room on the other side of the chamber (though that would be high levels of skulduggery, if they took up the Labour whip again in time to be candidates at the election following).
The Lib Dems would, I'd think, be concentrating on winning the seats to make it a necessary question to answer, and the Tories seem to be preoccupied with internal post-election manoeuvring.
No, the Tories are going to be in the intensive care unit or a secure psych ward. Seriously. If these polls verify they will so shocked and traumatised it will take money months for them to return to “normality” - and indeed they might not do so
Some of these polls put them on about 30 seats and behind the Lib Dems, with Farage chortling at them in the Commons
So for the three most recent polls there is quite a lot of consistency. Herding in the final week?
Lab 39,40, 42 so let’s call it LAB 40% Con 20,20, 23 so let’s call it CON 22% to be generous RFM 14, 15, 16 so RFM 15% LibDem 11,12,12 so let’s call it LibDem 12% GRN 5,6,6 so let’s call it GREEN 6%
Fed into EC without tactical that would yield a Lab majority of c. 230 with the tories and LibDems vying for second place on around 70.
I still think the Conservative vote share will rise a little and that Labour and Reform may slip a little further but I accept that time is limited.
I think Farage has Ratnered the Reform brand with his position snugly in Putin's small intestine on Ukraine. There will be a close correlation between those who are proud of the UK's assistance to Ukraine and those who might have considered voting Reform. I genuinely can't see Reform coming close to the Conservative vote.
Perhaps my only bright spot of this whole election would be Farage losing in Clacton.
Rare agreement by me with a Tory. Farage losing would be magnificent, and I would get even more joy from that than from my eager desire for JRM to be decapitated.
I would certainly share your joy in both cases.
Landslide defeat for govt, Reform damp squib and Lib Dems surprising on the upside are my wish list for next week.
That plus Galloway losing in Rochdale, Corbyn losing in Islington and some weird and surprising results to keep the interest up.
I'm setting up a watch party/shitposting group for some politically-inclined friends and thinking of some talking points, side plots, seats to watch and maybe a bingo card. From the top of my head, the main things are:
* scale of defeat * allied to these, notable scalps * Gorgeous and Corbz * SNP collapse? * The Farage Ascendency * Greens - better in the shires or the cities? * The Vaz madness in Leicester * Effect (if any) of 'personal votes' * Shameless Con leadership manoeuvring * Alliance in NI
There will be a lot to chat on through the night. Anything anyone else has a particular eye on, or other interesting mini dramas?
Ashfield, with the Ashfield Independents, and Lee Anderson for RFM, is a seat to watch (though maybe that's included in your Farage Ascendancy?)
Particular things you might want to keep an eye on, depending on the interest in your group, is whether the Tories are wiped out in particular areas: Wales, Scotland, North West, etc, or seats with Premier League football grounds, County Cricket grounds, Warhammer stores, etc.
I'm going to look up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds). I also want to keep a running total of the area of seats won - will Labour reach a majority by constituency land area?
Looking up the cricket grounds (including outgrounds) strikes me as a cheerfully pointless endeavour. Fully on board with that. My guess is that the main grounds are largely Lab now and will become possibly solely Lab; but that the outgrounds favour the Tories.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess). Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby. Very much looking forward to this...
Derbyshire are whatever Derby seat the County Ground is in, and Chesterfield where Queens Park is for an outground - but Chesterfield is already Labour.
My impression of Ashfield is that it will be close-run between Lee Anderson and Labour.
Zadrozny is now out to 8:1 having started at 4s and 5s.
Even down at 36% that's still a 230 majority. LDs also the OO on that poll, even if CorRef merge...
Con 56, Lab 440, LD 82, Ref 22, Green 4, SNP 23, PC 4, Others 19
I'm still scratching my head at the ludicrous Green shares some pollsters persist in publishing. And this one is up two. Something is happening with the Green party. It's odd, they've had virtually no coverage yet there they are.
LLG is up 3 and RefCon down 2 in that poll. LLG 59, RefCon 35. So despite looking very different from other pollsters on individual parties it's bang on average on a left vs right basis.
There is a serious chance we will surprise everyone.
Greens. Outside of Bristol and Brighton what seat will they get? 0.
Farage is a fucking idiot. He would now - I am sure - be well ahead of the Tories if he hadn’t vomited up his foolishness about Putin
The people are desperate for alternative to the Tories AND Labour - but they’re not gonna vote for a party that thinks “Hitler had his reasons”
Funny how election campaigns always cause politicians to say stupid things that damage their own position, such as Starmer yesterday with his Bangladesh comments.
Indeed yes, and then there are his electoral reform comments.
Does anybody still think that the LLG group of voters still looks on Starmer favourably? He has betrayed everybody.
Farage is a fucking idiot. He would now - I am sure - be well ahead of the Tories if he hadn’t vomited up his foolishness about Putin
The people are desperate for alternative to the Tories AND Labour - but they’re not gonna vote for a party that thinks “Hitler had his reasons”
Funny how election campaigns always cause politicians to say stupid things that damage their own position, such as Starmer yesterday with his Bangladesh comments.
@Leon was mocked mercilessly, not least by me, months ago for claiming he might vote Starmer. Yet he is voting Starmer. So I guess I was wrong.
The most Tory member of the VoteUK forum is also voting Labour, as some sort of protest against the government.
Of course, we all look forward to the day when HYUFD reports voting LibDem.
I don’t think I’ll live long enough to read that he’s voted Labour.
I believe HYUFD is a former Plaid Cymru supporter, so he could be termed a swing voter.
No I voted for every Tory candidate even then but there were 6 candidates to vote for in that Town council election but after I had voted for all 4 Tory candidates the only candidates to vote for were Plaid. I would otherwise have voted LD to use all my votes but there were no LD candidates
You didn't have to use all 6 votes. And those Plaid votes could have cost Tory candidates their seats. Always "plump" for your own party.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Yes, we've talked about this a bit. It will be down to the Speaker to adjudicate. Much potential for all sorts of things to affect it - by-elections, defections, coalitions, perhaps His Majesty's Very Loyal Opposition, if a bunch of Labour backbenchers decided there is more room on the other side of the chamber (though that would be high levels of skulduggery, if they took up the Labour whip again in time to be candidates at the election following).
The Lib Dems would, I'd think, be concentrating on winning the seats to make it a necessary question to answer, and the Tories seem to be preoccupied with internal post-election manoeuvring.
How about Tories 61 seats, LibDems 60 seats and then Rishi does what we all know he will......
Surely they could park the ISS somewhere like a Lagrange point or something as all that stuff could be used more usefully than polluting the Pacific? Maybe even as an emergency refuge.
Well they’re not going to get Boeing to do it, after all the crap that company is currently giving NASA.
The problem is that it will rapidly degrade and start to disintegrate once systems start being switched off, so it needs to be either pushed deep into space or brought back to Earth.
Just seems rather unambitious and wasteful to me.
Getting to one of the stable Lagrange points (L4 or L5) needs roughly the same delta-v as getting to the moon, about 4km/s
The delta-v needed to do a controlled deorbit, by contrast, is only on the order of 100m/s.
So it's much, much easier to de-orbit than to park it at L5.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
Yes, we've talked about this a bit. It will be down to the Speaker to adjudicate. Much potential for all sorts of things to affect it - by-elections, defections, coalitions, perhaps His Majesty's Very Loyal Opposition, if a bunch of Labour backbenchers decided there is more room on the other side of the chamber (though that would be high levels of skulduggery, if they took up the Labour whip again in time to be candidates at the election following).
The Lib Dems would, I'd think, be concentrating on winning the seats to make it a necessary question to answer, and the Tories seem to be preoccupied with internal post-election manoeuvring.
How about Tories 61 seats, LibDems 60 seats and then Rishi does what we all know he will......
Even down at 36% that's still a 230 majority. LDs also the OO on that poll, even if CorRef merge...
Con 56, Lab 440, LD 82, Ref 22, Green 4, SNP 23, PC 4, Others 19
I'm still scratching my head at the ludicrous Green shares some pollsters persist in publishing. And this one is up two. Something is happening with the Green party. It's odd, they've had virtually no coverage yet there they are.
LLG is up 3 and RefCon down 2 in that poll. LLG 59, RefCon 35. So despite looking very different from other pollsters on individual parties it's bang on average on a left vs right basis.
There is a serious chance we will surprise everyone.
Greens. Outside of Bristol and Brighton what seat will they get? 0.
Comments
"Fermanagh and South Tyrone (UK Parliament constituency) - Wikipedia" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermanagh_and_South_Tyrone_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
Ile de Sein. C’est magnifique
And the weirdness keeps coming. Here’s the story of the church
“The chapel of Saint Corentin was rebuilt in 1970 on the ruins of an old chapel dating from the 12th century. According to tradition, Saint Guénolé, too bothered on the mainland by the faithful, decided to take refuge on the island of Seidhun (Sein). He built a priory there, before leaving to found the Abbey of Landévennec. According to the archives, the Abbey of Landévennec provided for several centuries the religious service of the island, which owed it in compensation "150 hake of rent".”
And you think rents in London are high? They paid three figures in hake EVERY YEAR. I’d have thought 80 hake, tops
Plus seems like the only likely ones still need constant corrections (being dynamically unstable) so you need supplies of fuel etc.
https://science.nasa.gov/solar-system/resources/faq/what-are-lagrange-points/
You may have knowledge that makes the odds wrong but it's the influence you also have that is problematic.
How did your Settle-Carlisle trip go? I think it was you?
Bad example to get all agitated about though. The payout is going to be nil whether the odds are 60 or 6 million.
I'll give you Lancs (Stretford and Urmston) for starters. Think the outgrounds are Aigburth (Liverpool Riverside, I think) and, I think Lytham (which would be Fylde, I guess).
Where else? Durham (Chester-le-Street) would be Durham North. Notts would be Rushcliffe. Yorkshire I think is Leeds NW, with Scarborough as Scarborough and Whitby.
Very much looking forward to this...
The important thing here is that remember this is a banking system - if what is written in that email doesn't scare you enough to resign immediately nothing will...
Especially if betting on politics at the moment.
The problem is that it will rapidly degrade and start to disintegrate once systems start being switched off, so it needs to be either pushed deep into space or brought back to Earth.
Let's say Tories end up with a few more seats than LibDems. Official opposition status awaits.
Might be tempting for a few Starmer-sceptic Labour MPs to jump ship to LibDems and push their numbers past the Tories. In those circs do the LibDems become official opposition with all the extra profile and perquisites?
Might the DUP take the Tory whip to get them over the line? APNI do the same for LibDems?
Will this be being war-gamed?
My impression of Ashfield is that it will be close-run between Lee Anderson and Labour.
Zadrozny is now out to 8:1 having started at 4s and 5s.
But that could be weight of the market on Reform of course.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/ashfield
And the Lib Dems would be after the centralist Labour MPs who are likely to do well under and like Starmer.
https://xkcd.com/208/
Got to say it was one of those things were you look at the contract and think - well there is no-one else in any fit state to deal with the work required.
A clear political gain for Lab and Lib, and Tories more thoroughly buried. Hmmm.
Lab: 36% (-1 from 19-20 Jun)
Con: 18% (-1)
Reform UK: 17% (-1)
Lib Dem: 15% (+2)
Green: 8% (+2)
SNP: 3% (=)
https://x.com/yougov/status/1806283514288988386?s=61&t=c6bcp0cjChLfQN5Tc8A_6g
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broxtowe_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
@alexwickham
·
53m
7 days to go: @BloombergUK poll of polls
Tories hit a new low
Lib Dems reach their highest rating of the campaign
https://x.com/alexwickham
📈Labour and SNP drawing level
🌹LAB 34% (-4)
🎗️SNP 34% (+1)
🌳CON 14% (-1)
🔶LD 7% (=)
⬜️Other 10% (+3)
1,042 Scottish adults, 21-26 June
(change from 14-18 June)
https://x.com/savanta_uk/status/1806226065725042914?s=61&t=c6bcp0cjChLfQN5Tc8A_6g
LAB: 36% (-1)
CON: 18% (-1)
REF: 17% (-1)
LDEM: 15% (+2)
GRN: 8% (+2)
2010: I'm going to join the Labour Party!
2015: I'm now heavily involved in campaigning!
2017: I'm now a Labour councillor!
2019: I stood for parliament for Labour but lost.
2024 (early July): I stood for parliament for Labour and won!
2024 (mid July): I suddenly remembered about Iraq and crossed the floor to join the Lib Dems
Actually, maybe not.
Con 56, Lab 440, LD 82, Ref 22, Green 4, SNP 23, PC 4, Others 19
Dave is the best LOTO this century.
Sadly, he screwed up royally as PM and let the country down badly as a result.
The people are desperate for alternative to the Tories AND Labour - but they’re not gonna vote for a party that thinks “Hitler had his reasons”
The Lib Dems would, I'd think, be concentrating on winning the seats to make it a necessary question to answer, and the Tories seem to be preoccupied with internal post-election manoeuvring.
The Oval (Surrey) is (and always has been) Labour (prev Vauxhall, now Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) - but Surrey's outground at Guildford will also (presumably) be a Lib Dem gain from Conservative...
The Tories only hope is that on Thursday a million people wake up and think "y'know what, I'm going to vote Tory after all"
LLG is up 3 and RefCon down 2 in that poll. LLG 59, RefCon 35. So despite looking very different from other pollsters on individual parties it's bang on average on a left vs right basis.
I think the solid barriers are to do with police and football crowd control, but it needs a better answer. It has 6 traffic lanes for ~35k AADT, which is difficult to defend in the context.
The answer will involve I think initially taking one lane as 2-way cycling to the other side of the barriers, and in due course one lane for a tram track. Or something more radical. Extra politics as it is a County managed road.
Some of these polls put them on about 30 seats and behind the Lib Dems, with Farage chortling at them in the Commons
The fairly engaging young Tory whipper-snapper made a whole movie about trying to find him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzrH0yL1Fgk
Although I look at the Green policies and ask where are the actual ecology policies?
I fear it leaves you short of voting options, or have you already sent a postal vote in?
Does anybody still think that the LLG group of voters still looks on Starmer favourably? He has betrayed everybody.
Always "plump" for your own party.
The delta-v needed to do a controlled deorbit, by contrast, is only on the order of 100m/s.
So it's much, much easier to de-orbit than to park it at L5.