The Tories are heading into the abyss of apathy and irrelevance – politicalbetting.com

System

The Tories are heading into the abyss of apathy and irrelevance – politicalbetting.com

Probably the most brutal polling for the Conservatives I’ve seen from us.6 in 10 tell @IpsosUK they don’t care who the next Tory leader is https://t.co/i2QZoYzIlA pic.twitter.com/nIraYa12bo

Read the full story here

Mexicanpete

First like Honest Bob.

Perhaps the Conservative Party needs to embrace Nigel to survive.

They won't get my vote, but then they were never likely too. They would however regain Johnson's coalition from 2019.

Although, to an extent, all they would be saving is the name.

bondegezou

First, like Tugendhat in the favourability stakes

EDIT: On recount, second like Stride.

ydoethur

The Liberals were split into multiple recognised factions, with separate leaders, some in government, some in opposition. That's why Labour took over as the official opposition as the largest single group. They should have done it earlier, but as until 1922 they didn't have a recognised leader (a 'chairman' was elected annually to act as chief spokesman) Maclean and then Asquith continued to act as leader of the Opposition by default.

After 1924 the Liberals were reunited but had only 40 seats and were clearly the third party. They also suffered from continuing to have a dual leadership - the superannuated and discredited Asquith in the Lords, and the energetic but distrusted and slippery Lloyd George in the Commons.

None of those currently apply to the Tories. Of course, it may happen - a grouping led by a complete loon like Jenrick or Braverman may split off and form a new party, or defections to Reform and the Liberal Democrats may erode their limited parliamentary party. But at this moment they are still clearly the second party and will be the Opposition by right not by default.

The key trick is to rebuild to seem credible again. For that, Cleverly would be the best candidate. Unfortunately, it looks like they're going for an idiot who can't stop banging on about nonsense policies like Rwanda that are as credible as Donald Trump's tax returns.

ydoethur

Mexicanpete said:

First like Honest Bob.

Perhaps the Conservative Party needs to embrace Nigel to survive.

They won't get my vote, but then they were never likely too. They would however regain Johnson's coalition from 2019.

Although, to an extent, all they would be saving is the name.

What the scorpion did and said to the frog.

Taz

For those who find these edgy centrist Dads amusing. Led By Donkeys are displaying their work in Bristol.

https://x.com/bristol247/status/1824323956993822822?s=61

TheScreamingEagles

For some reason Wordpress gobbled my last sentence. Fixed now.

I think the Tories being eclipsed by the Liberal Democrats in terms of seats at the next election is more likely than the Tories being the largest party in a hung parliament after the next election.

Mexicanpete

Mexicanpete said:

First like Honest Bob.

Perhaps the Conservative Party needs to embrace Nigel to survive.

They won't get my vote, but then they were never likely too. They would however regain Johnson's coalition from 2019.

Although, to an extent, all they would be saving is the name.

Sorry, too many "o"s.

ydoethur

TheScreamingEagles said:

For some reason Wordpress gobbled my last sentence. Fixed now.

I think the Tories being eclipsed by the Liberal Democrats in terms of seats at the next election is more likely than the Tories being the largest party in a hung parliament after the next election.

Yes, that is true, but neither is terribly likely.

ydoethur

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Mexicanpete

ydoethur said:

Mexicanpete said:

First like Honest Bob.

Perhaps the Conservative Party needs to embrace Nigel to survive.

They won't get my vote, but then they were never likely too. They would however regain Johnson's coalition from 2019.

Although, to an extent, all they would be saving is the name.

What the scorpion did and said to the frog.

A Russian fable is particularly apt when responding to a post involving Nigel.

Taz

Kamala goes full on YIMBY.

Good for her on this.

https://x.com/cafedujord/status/1824523780775088202?s=61

TheScreamingEagles

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Alistair Carmichael also served in the cabinet as Secretary of State for Scotland.

He was Malleus ScotNatorum during the Indyref.

kamski

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

For some reason Wordpress gobbled my last sentence. Fixed now.

I think the Tories being eclipsed by the Liberal Democrats in terms of seats at the next election is more likely than the Tories being the largest party in a hung parliament after the next election.

Yes, that is true, but neither is terribly likely.

Conservatives being largest party (whether hung or not) after next election isn't that unlikely. They only need this government to be unpopular (quite likely) and people to have forgotten how bad they were last time (will be true to a certain extent but maybe not enough).

They remain the default opposition.

Mexicanpete

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Ed is but a youngster. It was not that long ago when posters were pondering who would replace Johnson when he finally called it a day midway through his fifth term.

HYUFD

Voters may not care that much now who becomes Tory leader after giving them a landslide defeat and in a warm summer where so far Labour have only really hit pensioners. Come late autumn when Labour have increased taxes yet further, strikes are taking place across the public sector and train network and the boats are coming still unstopped and the weather is cold and miserable I expect they will care rather more.

The only realistic alternative to replace the Tories anyway as the main party of the right is Reform not the LDs. If they didn't do it last month hard to see them ever doing it. If the LDs became a centre right party they would of course split in half with their social democratic wing defecting en masse to Labour as much of it did anyway after the 2010 LD coalition government with the Tories. Hence even on 4th July the LDs got just 12% or only half the Tories 24% and behind Reform on 14% too and far behind Labour on 33%.

On a net basis Tugendhat does best with voters followed by Stride and Jenrick. That is about right with Tugendhat and Stride more likely to appeal to Tory voters in 2019 who went Labour and LD this time and Jenrick more likely to appeal to voters who went Reform

ydoethur

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Alistair Carmichael also served in the cabinet as Secretary of State for Scotland.

He was Malleus ScotNatorum during the Indyref.

Gosh, I didn't realise he was still in Parliament. I thought he'd called it a day in 2019.

Mind you, at risk of a literal No True Scotsman fallacy, I don't think it makes much difference to my point.

SandyRentool

Patel illicits a response from voters, more than any of the others. If the Tories want to remain relevant, then clearly there is only one option:

#Priti4Leader

TheScreamingEagles

Talking about North Britain, the SNP are going full Corbynite.

Angus Robertson met with the Israeli deputy ambassador and that led to a backlash including Humza Yousaf's wife having a go at Angus Robertson.

Then John Mason MSP went full Barty defending the meeting.

If Israel wanted to commit genocide, they would have killed ten times as many.

https://x.com/JohnMasonMSP/status/1824560329352941820

Mexicanpete

HYUFD said:

Voters may not care that much now who becomes Tory leader after giving them a landslide defeat and in a warm summer where so far Labour have only really hit pensioners. Come late autumn when Labour have increased taxes yet further, strikes are taking place across the public sector and train network and the boats are coming still unstopped and the weather is cold and miserable I expect they will care rather more.

The only realistic alternative to replace the Tories anyway as the main party of the right is Reform not the LDs. If they didn't do it last month hard to see them ever doing it. If the LDs became a centre right party they would of course split in half with their social democratic wing defecting en masse to Labour as much of it did anyway after the 2010 LD coalition government with the Tories. Hence even on 4th July the LDs got just 12% or only half the Tories 24% and behind Reform on 14% too and far behind Labour on 33%.

On a net basis Tugendhat does best with voters followed by Stride and Jenrick. That is about right with Tugendhat and Stride more likely to appeal to Tory voters in 2019 who went Labour and LD this time and Jenrick more likely to appeal to voters who went Reform

Surely if your first paragraph comes to pass, all it will serve to do is remind voters that Labour have failed on all those metrics that marked Conservative failure from the last Parliament. Labour have failed on all the bits and bobs the Conservatives failed on, let's vote in the Conservatives to fail some more is not a likely outcome

Although you have a point, should Labour fail as you predict we have a shiny new fash-lite populist snake oil salesman to lead us to the promised land and if he does prevail it is not to the advantage of the Conservative Party.

Scott_xP

TheScreamingEagles said:

Talking about North Britain, the SNP are going full Corbynite.

Angus Robertson met with the Israeli deputy ambassador and that led to a backlash including Humza Yousaf's wife having a go at Angus Robertson.

Then John Mason MSP went full Barty defending the meeting.

If Israel wanted to commit genocide, they would have killed ten times as many.

https://x.com/JohnMasonMSP/status/1824560329352941820

@holyroodmandy

Be interesting to see if the SNP end up suspending the whip from John Mason but not from Angus Robertson.

Casino_Royale

Rubbish.

Casino_Royale

Taz said:

Kamala goes full on YIMBY.

Good for her on this.

https://x.com/cafedujord/status/1824523780775088202?s=61

America is far too decentralised for her to deliver on that.

Casino_Royale

Taz said:

For those who find these edgy centrist Dads amusing. Led By Donkeys are displaying their work in Bristol.

https://x.com/bristol247/status/1824323956993822822?s=61

They're left-wing activists, not centrist Dads.

Centrist Dads is just something the former say to make themselves look moderate and normal.

ClippP

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

TheScreamingEagles

ClippP said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

Jeremy Hunt, IDS, and Andrew Mitchell

HYUFD

SandyRentool said:

Patel illicits a response from voters, more than any of the others. If the Tories want to remain relevant, then clearly there is only one option:

#Priti4Leader

Given Patel has the worst negatives with voters by far she is the LDs ideal Tory leader

Stuartinromford

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

That makes him Davey than Farage (60), Lowe (66), Tice (59) and arguably better-preserved than Anderson (an old-looking 57; all that anger can't be doing his health much good.)

As for the Conservative leadership, part of me thinks that they have to get "if only we embrace Reform, everything will be fine" out of their system. As with Foot, IDS, Corbyn (and arguably Swinson), something about modern political parties means that they have to utterly indulge themselves and see the electoral conseqences of that before they remember that they are there to please the public. Except, from this starting point, that really could kill the party.

MarqueeMark

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDx_inVsD2M

"Doomsday for Republicans" - Senate race polling is very encouraging for Democrats.

Plus, Trump's lead in Florida is down to 3% (from 6%)

Fishing

Taz said:

Kamala goes full on YIMBY.

Good for her on this.

https://x.com/cafedujord/status/1824523780775088202?s=61

Empty disingenuous garbage, like most of her (and Trump's) promises.

As she well knows, housing in America is a state and local matter, especially in places where people actually want to live.

ClippP

TheScreamingEagles said:

ClippP said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

Jeremy Hunt, IDS, and Andrew Mitchell

Thanks for that, Mr Eagles. But none of them now frontbenchers? Or are they?

Stuartinromford

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

ydoethur

ClippP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ClippP said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

Jeremy Hunt, IDS, and Andrew Mitchell

Thanks for that, Mr Eagles. But none of them now frontbenchers? Or are they?

Hunt is.

TheScreamingEagles

ClippP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ClippP said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

Jeremy Hunt, IDS, and Andrew Mitchell

Thanks for that, Mr Eagles. But none of them now frontbenchers? Or are they?

Hunt is Shadow Chancellor and Mitchell is Shadow Foreign Secretary.

Carnyx

I see the imaginary Mr and Ms Lewis score better than any real persons.

Maybe they ought to bring back the lettuce, or find an old stuffed Andy Pandy doll?

Stuartinromford

ClippP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ClippP said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

Jeremy Hunt, IDS, and Andrew Mitchell

Thanks for that, Mr Eagles. But none of them now frontbenchers? Or are they?

Hunt is still Shadow Chancellor. And whilst everyone expected him to go (remember the Coutinho will become Chancellor, just to annoy Reeves rumours?), can any Conservative leader with a party of 121 really afford to put him out to pasture?

Stuartinromford

Stuartinromford said:

ClippP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ClippP said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

Jeremy Hunt, IDS, and Andrew Mitchell

Thanks for that, Mr Eagles. But none of them now frontbenchers? Or are they?

Hunt is still Shadow Chancellor. And whilst everyone expected him to go (remember the Coutinho will become Chancellor, just to annoy Reeves rumours?), can any Conservative leader with a party of 121 really afford to put him out to pasture?

ETA: I see others have made this point and topped it- I'd forgotten about Mitchell. Which I guess highlights how irrelevant His Majesty's Loyal Opposition is just now.

FrancisUrquhart

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

For those who find these edgy centrist Dads amusing. Led By Donkeys are displaying their work in Bristol.

https://x.com/bristol247/status/1824323956993822822?s=61

They're left-wing activists, not centrist Dads.

Centrist Dads is just something the former say to make themselves look moderate and normal.

They were exposed a while back and from memory worked for GreenPeace / involved in left wing politics. Just another example of well connected well off people.

TheScreamingEagles

Stuartinromford said:

ClippP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ClippP said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

Jeremy Hunt, IDS, and Andrew Mitchell

Thanks for that, Mr Eagles. But none of them now frontbenchers? Or are they?

Hunt is still Shadow Chancellor. And whilst everyone expected him to go (remember the Coutinho will become Chancellor, just to annoy Reeves rumours?), can any Conservative leader with a party of 121 really afford to put him out to pasture?

Hunt might want to go to the backbenches or prefer less high profile job.

Apart from the Boris years, Hunt served in the cabinet for eleven out of the fourteen years the Tories were in government.

He was the longest ever serving Health Secretary (six years), had stints as Foreign Secretary and Chancellor, plus two years at DCMS at the height of the phone hacking scandal.

I know some people who know Jeremy quite well, they think he'd want to be the Keith Joseph to the new Tory leader.

TheScreamingEagles

Stuartinromford said:

Stuartinromford said:

ClippP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

ClippP said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Just as a matter of interest, how many of the current crop of Conservative MPs served in the Cabinet of the Coalition Government?

Those who served in a Cabinet after 2015 just learned about back-stabbing and jockeying for position, so they are not very relevant for a new clean Conservative government.

I suspect the current group of Lib Dem MPs have the advantage.

Jeremy Hunt, IDS, and Andrew Mitchell

Thanks for that, Mr Eagles. But none of them now frontbenchers? Or are they?

Hunt is still Shadow Chancellor. And whilst everyone expected him to go (remember the Coutinho will become Chancellor, just to annoy Reeves rumours?), can any Conservative leader with a party of 121 really afford to put him out to pasture?

ETA: I see others have made this point and topped it- I'd forgotten about Mitchell. Which I guess highlights how irrelevant His Majesty's Loyal Opposition is just now.

Succeeding Lord Cameron is an impossible job.

rcs1000

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Well, Donald Trump is planning to be President until he's 82 years old. And Davey seems to be in rather better shape than Trump, so I'd reckon we have at least another quarter century of him to come.

DavidL

It really doesn't matter to anyone, other than the Tories, who the next leader of the party is. They will never be anything significant nor will they ever implement any of their policy ideas. The Tories face a long time in the wilderness after the excesses of the last few years.

From the Tories' own perspective the job of the next leader is to try and recover 100 seats or so so that the party is in a position to be in contention the election after next. They also need to find some new talent in the somewhat shallow pool available and start thinking about what a Conservative party led country would actually look like. The details won't matter but the direction of travel will.

For me, and I accept this might simply be my own prejudices, this means rejecting, mocking and attacking the siren voices of Reform and trying to win back a few million votes from them. It means a clear vision of a prosperous country with smaller government, lower taxes, less debt, more home grown businesses, with equality of opportunity and mutual respect for all of our citizens of whatever colour, creed or orientation. Maybe then the next leadership campaign will be of more interest.

ydoethur

We missed an important anniversary a week ago.

Or alternatively, it's coming up on Tuesday.

On the 9th August 1999 Putin was nominated as Prime Minister of Russia, replacing Sergey Stapashin.

Confirmed and formally took office on the 19th.

Which means he's been in power (allowing that Yeltsin was very ill and mostly drunk by then) for 25 years.

That would, depending on how you count Stalin (and December 1928 is the favoured start date for considering him the leader) make him the longest serving leader of Russia since 1881.

Given another year, since 1855.

Taz

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

For those who find these edgy centrist Dads amusing. Led By Donkeys are displaying their work in Bristol.

https://x.com/bristol247/status/1824323956993822822?s=61

They're left-wing activists, not centrist Dads.

Centrist Dads is just something the former say to make themselves look moderate and normal.

They were set up to hold truth to power, as the saying goes, now they’re just desperate to remain relevant. They will never do the same to labour

Nigelb

Mexicanpete said:

First like Honest Bob.

Perhaps the Conservative Party needs to embrace Nigel to survive.

They won't get my vote, but then they were never likely too. They would however regain Johnson's coalition from 2019.

Although, to an extent, all they would be saving is the name.

I'm flattered - and insofar as that would mean returning to one nation conservatism, you're arguably correct.
But it's a heavy price you're asking of me.

Taz

FrancisUrquhart said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

For those who find these edgy centrist Dads amusing. Led By Donkeys are displaying their work in Bristol.

https://x.com/bristol247/status/1824323956993822822?s=61

They're left-wing activists, not centrist Dads.

Centrist Dads is just something the former say to make themselves look moderate and normal.

They were exposed a while back and from memory worked for GreenPeace / involved in left wing politics. Just another example of well connected well off people.

The group formed in a craft beer pub in Stoke Newington.

Their LinkedIn profiles show the usual predictable path.

Sean_F

The Conservatives might fade away, but they'd be replaced by a party on the same side of the political spectrum. About 40% support right wing parties, and that vote won't remain fortuitously split, forever. Either, it will gravitate to one party (and I think that's most likely to be the Conservatives, rather than Reform), or they'll vote tactically.

Taz

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Kamala goes full on YIMBY.

Good for her on this.

https://x.com/cafedujord/status/1824523780775088202?s=61

America is far too decentralised for her to deliver on that.

Will she deliver price controls. A sure fire winner.

https://x.com/marionawfal/status/1824515100167766018?s=61

Sean_F

ydoethur said:

The Liberals were split into multiple recognised factions, with separate leaders, some in government, some in opposition. That's why Labour took over as the official opposition as the largest single group. They should have done it earlier, but as until 1922 they didn't have a recognised leader (a 'chairman' was elected annually to act as chief spokesman) Maclean and then Asquith continued to act as leader of the Opposition by default.

After 1924 the Liberals were reunited but had only 40 seats and were clearly the third party. They also suffered from continuing to have a dual leadership - the superannuated and discredited Asquith in the Lords, and the energetic but distrusted and slippery Lloyd George in the Commons.

None of those currently apply to the Tories. Of course, it may happen - a grouping led by a complete loon like Jenrick or Braverman may split off and form a new party, or defections to Reform and the Liberal Democrats may erode their limited parliamentary party. But at this moment they are still clearly the second party and will be the Opposition by right not by default.

The key trick is to rebuild to seem credible again. For that, Cleverly would be the best candidate. Unfortunately, it looks like they're going for an idiot who can't stop banging on about nonsense policies like Rwanda that are as credible as Donald Trump's tax returns.

The Liberals actually won 303 seats, in at least one election, between 1918-31, but only 24 in every election. It's a testament to their splits, and appalling disorganisation.

Carnyx

rcs1000 said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Well, Donald Trump is planning to be President until he's 82 years old. And Davey seems to be in rather better shape than Trump, so I'd reckon we have at least another quarter century of him to come.

Sure, but Mr Trump only talks about sharks - he is not filmed going swimming with them or whatever it is to which Mr Davey will have had to escalate to by the time of the election after the next.

Casino_Royale

Sean_F said:

The Conservatives might fade away, but they'd be replaced by a party on the same side of the political spectrum. About 40% support right wing parties, and that vote won't remain fortuitously split, forever. Either, it will gravitate to one party (and I think that's most likely to be the Conservatives, rather than Reform), or they'll vote tactically.

The current administration is also doing lots of things, even in its first 6 weeks, that will drive consolidation of that vote against it.

Lots of the people that will feel the pain from this Government will be natural centre-right voters, with a plenty good number of them in LD seats and LD target seats.

ydoethur

Carnyx said:

rcs1000 said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Well, Donald Trump is planning to be President until he's 82 years old. And Davey seems to be in rather better shape than Trump, so I'd reckon we have at least another quarter century of him to come.

Sure, but Mr Trump only talks about sharks - he is not filmed going swimming with them or whatever it is to which Mr Davey will have had to escalate to by the time of the election after the next.

He should jump a shark on a paddleboard. Whacking it on the nose with his paddle as he goes past.

Shits and giggles. We'd have the giggles.

Although the shits wouldn't help with that pollution problem.

Stuartinromford

Sean_F said:

The Conservatives might fade away, but they'd be replaced by a party on the same side of the political spectrum. About 40% support right wing parties, and that vote won't remain fortuitously split, forever. Either, it will gravitate to one party (and I think that's most likely to be the Conservatives, rather than Reform), or they'll vote tactically.

Voters to the right of Labour aren't going away, no. But as long as they are split between parties fighting each other, FPTP makes them a lot less relevant.

Casino_Royale

Taz said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

For those who find these edgy centrist Dads amusing. Led By Donkeys are displaying their work in Bristol.

https://x.com/bristol247/status/1824323956993822822?s=61

They're left-wing activists, not centrist Dads.

Centrist Dads is just something the former say to make themselves look moderate and normal.

They were exposed a while back and from memory worked for GreenPeace / involved in left wing politics. Just another example of well connected well off people.

The group formed in a craft beer pub in Stoke Newington.

Their LinkedIn profiles show the usual predictable path.

The first sentence alone tells you everything you need to know. Almost a cliché.

MarqueeMark

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Let's get real. The people who are going to be hurting most under this Government are going to be in those seats the LibDems took from the Tories. They are going to have ZERO sway to stop Labour hurting their voters.

There's huge poential for buyers' remorse from those who voted LibDem and feel they are being shafted by this Government. LibDems are going to be on defence, not offence, next time out.

rcs1000

Carnyx said:

rcs1000 said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Well, Donald Trump is planning to be President until he's 82 years old. And Davey seems to be in rather better shape than Trump, so I'd reckon we have at least another quarter century of him to come.

Sure, but Mr Trump only talks about sharks - he is not filmed going swimming with them or whatever it is to which Mr Davey will have had to escalate to by the time of the election after the next.

Actually, Mr Davey will be wrestling a shark live on TV. Now, there are some who say that his choice of an open air arena, favours the lung breathing human, but I say good on him.

Malmesbury

Fishing said:

Taz said:

Kamala goes full on YIMBY.

Good for her on this.

https://x.com/cafedujord/status/1824523780775088202?s=61

Empty disingenuous garbage, like most of her (and Trump's) promises.

As she well knows, housing in America is a state and local matter, especially in places where people actually want to live.

To be fair, the Federal government *could* swoop in to compulsory purchase land and overturn local and state building codes.

But to do that in peacetime would be a very good way to collapse a presidency. Pretty much unthinkable.

Cicero

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

Patel illicits a response from voters, more than any of the others. If the Tories want to remain relevant, then clearly there is only one option:

#Priti4Leader

Given Patel has the worst negatives with voters by far she is the LDs ideal Tory leader

All of the current Tory candidates are good for the Lib Dems. Patel is simply loathed, Badenoch is Patel without the broomstick accessory, but with a growing reputation for underhand dealings, Jenrick is conventional, but the cartoons nastiness makes him very Marmite even amongst Tory supporters and disliked elsewhere. Tugendhat is amiable but comes across as chinless, while Cleverly is a man for whom the very word "hapless" could have been coined. Even if the next Tory leader makes it to the next general election -not a given- the chances of any of these people becoming PM is vanishingly small. So the polls are right, why should anyone care?

Meanwhile there are some very serious new MPs on the Lib Dem benches (a surprising number of ex military, incidentally) and they have hit the ground running with perma-campaigns in held seats and plans to increase the national vote share and take the fight to the next tier of seats. I don´t think I have ever seen the party so fired up.

Meanwhile every day another more Tory members shuffle off this mortal coil and are not replaced. The leadership election should be the perfect time to recruit, but if anyone is doing that, it is not having much impact. If the Tories lose only another 25 seats to the Lib Dems, then Sir Edward Davey is the Leader of His Majesty´s Loyal Opposition and the Tories are done. At this point one can even wonder if the Tories are up for the fight. Europe doing to the Conservative and Unionist Party what Ireland and Asquithian High mindedness did to the Liberal Party.

Sean_F

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

The Conservatives might fade away, but they'd be replaced by a party on the same side of the political spectrum. About 40% support right wing parties, and that vote won't remain fortuitously split, forever. Either, it will gravitate to one party (and I think that's most likely to be the Conservatives, rather than Reform), or they'll vote tactically.

The current administration is also doing lots of things, even in its first 6 weeks, that will drive consolidation of that vote against it.

Lots of the people that will feel the pain from this Government will be natural centre-right voters, with a plenty good number of them in LD seats and LD target seats.

And, if you're in a seat like Llanelli, or Bradford South, the obvious thing for right wing voters to do now is to back Reform.

FrancisUrquhart

rcs1000 said:

Carnyx said:

rcs1000 said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Well, Donald Trump is planning to be President until he's 82 years old. And Davey seems to be in rather better shape than Trump, so I'd reckon we have at least another quarter century of him to come.

Sure, but Mr Trump only talks about sharks - he is not filmed going swimming with them or whatever it is to which Mr Davey will have had to escalate to by the time of the election after the next.

Actually, Mr Davey will be wrestling a shark live on TV. Now, there are some who say that his choice of an open air arena, favours the lung breathing human, but I say good on him.

I am still most disappointed how the Unknown Stunt man didn't finish his GE campaign with a water ski jump over shark infested waters.

Nunu5

MarqueeMark said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDx_inVsD2M

"Doomsday for Republicans" - Senate race polling is very encouraging for Democrats.

Plus, Trump's lead in Florida is down to 3% (from 6%)

Isn't that good for Trump? Considering he gets the same nber of EC whether he wins FL by 1 vote or a million

Taz

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Carnyx said:

rcs1000 said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Well, Donald Trump is planning to be President until he's 82 years old. And Davey seems to be in rather better shape than Trump, so I'd reckon we have at least another quarter century of him to come.

Sure, but Mr Trump only talks about sharks - he is not filmed going swimming with them or whatever it is to which Mr Davey will have had to escalate to by the time of the election after the next.

Actually, Mr Davey will be wrestling a shark live on TV. Now, there are some who say that his choice of an open air arena, favours the lung breathing human, but I say good on him.

I am still most disappointed how the Unknown Stunt man didn't finish his GE campaign with a water ski jump over shark infested waters.

He would literally jump the shark

Nigelb

Fishing said:

Taz said:

Kamala goes full on YIMBY.

Good for her on this.

https://x.com/cafedujord/status/1824523780775088202?s=61

Empty disingenuous garbage, like most of her (and Trump's) promises.

As she well knows, housing in America is a state and local matter, especially in places where people actually want to live.

That displays some ignorance of federal intervention in the U.S. housing market, which has a considerable history.

Maybe wait to hear the details before dismissing it in so cavalier a manner ?

Nigelb

Taz said:

Casino_Royale said:

Taz said:

Kamala goes full on YIMBY.

Good for her on this.

https://x.com/cafedujord/status/1824523780775088202?s=61

America is far too decentralised for her to deliver on that.

Will she deliver price controls. A sure fire winner.

https://x.com/marionawfal/status/1824515100167766018?s=61

No one, apart from the GOP, has mentioned price controls.

kjh

Cicero said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

Patel illicits a response from voters, more than any of the others. If the Tories want to remain relevant, then clearly there is only one option:

#Priti4Leader

Given Patel has the worst negatives with voters by far she is the LDs ideal Tory leader

All of the current Tory candidates are good for the Lib Dems. Patel is simply loathed, Badenoch is Patel without the broomstick accessory, but with a growing reputation for underhand dealings, Jenrick is conventional, but the cartoons nastiness makes him very Marmite even amongst Tory supporters and disliked elsewhere. Tugendhat is amiable but comes across as chinless, while Cleverly is a man for whom the very word "hapless" could have been coined. Even if the next Tory leader makes it to the next general election -not a given- the chances of any of these people becoming PM is vanishingly small. So the polls are right, why should anyone care?

Meanwhile there are some very serious new MPs on the Lib Dem benches (a surprising number of ex military, incidentally) and they have hit the ground running with perma-campaigns in held seats and plans to increase the national vote share and take the fight to the next tier of seats. I don´t think I have ever seen the party so fired up.

Meanwhile every day another more Tory members shuffle off this mortal coil and are not replaced. The leadership election should be the perfect time to recruit, but if anyone is doing that, it is not having much impact. If the Tories lose only another 25 seats to the Lib Dems, then Sir Edward Davey is the Leader of His Majesty´s Loyal Opposition and the Tories are done. At this point one can even wonder if the Tories are up for the fight. Europe doing to the Conservative and Unionist Party what Ireland and Asquithian High mindedness did to the Liberal Party.

Interestingly the LDs have continued campaigning in Guildford as if the election was still to happen. A constituency wide leaflet out and daily canvassing.

The Today programme this morning was covering the issue of Tories dying off rather than people moving Conservative as they get older. Didn't seem clear what that was based upon however.

Re the quality of the new MPs I only know a few, but the ones I know are quite impressive. Keep an eye on Chris Coghlan, a young Paddy Ashdown clone.

ydoethur

Taz said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

Carnyx said:

rcs1000 said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Well, Donald Trump is planning to be President until he's 82 years old. And Davey seems to be in rather better shape than Trump, so I'd reckon we have at least another quarter century of him to come.

Sure, but Mr Trump only talks about sharks - he is not filmed going swimming with them or whatever it is to which Mr Davey will have had to escalate to by the time of the election after the next.

Actually, Mr Davey will be wrestling a shark live on TV. Now, there are some who say that his choice of an open air arena, favours the lung breathing human, but I say good on him.

I am still most disappointed how the Unknown Stunt man didn't finish his GE campaign with a water ski jump over shark infested waters.

He would literally jump the shark

Would he have electrified the campaign?

ydoethur

I hadn't seen this bit.

Donald Trump has a table full of groceries next to him with before and after prices to illustrate inflation.

He then starts rambling wistfully about how nice some of them look, especially 'the Cheerios. I haven't seen Cheerios in a long time, I'm going to take them back to my cottage and have a lot of fun with them.'

What the actual fuckety fuck? I mean, sharks were bad enough, but - for real? He makes campaign speeches on the economy and says he hasn't seen cheerios in ages?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-cheerios-news-conference-b2597484.html

Stuartinromford

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Let's get real. The people who are going to be hurting most under this Government are going to be in those seats the LibDems took from the Tories. They are going to have ZERO sway to stop Labour hurting their voters.

There's huge poential for buyers' remorse from those who voted LibDem and feel they are being shafted by this Government. LibDems are going to be on defence, not offence, next time out.

Not how it worked in 2010. After all, why go to the trouble of replacing one type of opposition MP with another type? Lib Dem MPs will loudly (and utterly cynically) oppose nasty things Labour does- we're already seeing that with VAT on school fees and will see it with planning reform. And bluntly, it's a game that they play better than the Conservatives, because they have more experience.

Get to a situation where they have to be junior partners in a coalition and the game changes, as it did in 2015. But until then, those new Lib Dem MPs are going to be as hard to shift as Japanese Knotweed.

kinabalu

Don't the LDs need to shift right if they want to replace the Cons as the national alternative to Labour? Otherwise you'd have neither the centre right nor the right represented in any party with a chance at government. No skin off my nose, that, but given the political personality of the public it doesn't seem tenable.

ydoethur

Nunu5 said:

MarqueeMark said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDx_inVsD2M

"Doomsday for Republicans" - Senate race polling is very encouraging for Democrats.

Plus, Trump's lead in Florida is down to 3% (from 6%)

Isn't that good for Trump? Considering he gets the same nber of EC whether he wins FL by 1 vote or a million

Couple of considerations:

1) If he has to spend time and money shoring up Florida, that's time and money he can't spend on trying to actually win Arizona and Pennsylvania. Matters with scarce resources.

2) Remember there is also a Senate seat up for grabs in Florida.

MarqueeMark

Nunu5 said:

MarqueeMark said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDx_inVsD2M

"Doomsday for Republicans" - Senate race polling is very encouraging for Democrats.

Plus, Trump's lead in Florida is down to 3% (from 6%)

Isn't that good for Trump? Considering he gets the same nber of EC whether he wins FL by 1 vote or a million

Once Florida is in play as Toss Up, Trump has to start putting money into protecting it.

And Florida has abortion on the ballot in November. I still think once we are beyond Labor Day, Florida comes into play.

Nunu5

Wow, this is from GOP pollster
@FrankLuntz
:

“I’m trying to do a focus group tonight with undecided voters under the age of 27 for a major news outlet. And I can’t recruit young women to this, because they don’t exist as undecided voters,” he said.

https://x.com/Ritholtz/status/1824555443374391567

FF43

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Lib Dems becoming second party I think depends on Labour winning further seats from the Conservatives, which by is by no means impossible. It does depend on what happens with Reform, Labour remaining a lot more popular relative to the Conservatives and continued Labour/LD/Green tactical voting.

On the other hand I could also Lib Dems winning more seats off the Conservatives as that party wins seats off Labour if Labour goes into decline. The Lib Dems will become challengers at Labour's expense in some Tory seats.

Northern_Al

ydoethur said:

I hadn't seen this bit.

Donald Trump has a table full of groceries next to him with before and after prices to illustrate inflation.

He then starts rambling wistfully about how nice some of them look, especially 'the Cheerios. I haven't seen Cheerios in a long time, I'm going to take them back to my cottage and have a lot of fun with them.'

What the actual fuckety fuck? I mean, sharks were bad enough, but - for real? He makes campaign speeches on the economy and says he hasn't seen cheerios in ages?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-cheerios-news-conference-b2597484.html

Hopefully the US electorate will be saying Cheerio to Trump in a few months.

rottenborough

ydoethur said:

I hadn't seen this bit.

Donald Trump has a table full of groceries next to him with before and after prices to illustrate inflation.

He then starts rambling wistfully about how nice some of them look, especially 'the Cheerios. I haven't seen Cheerios in a long time, I'm going to take them back to my cottage and have a lot of fun with them.'

What the actual fuckety fuck? I mean, sharks were bad enough, but - for real? He makes campaign speeches on the economy and says he hasn't seen cheerios in ages?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-cheerios-news-conference-b2597484.html

Never mind the Cheerios, what's this about "his cottage"?

Casino_Royale

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Let's get real. The people who are going to be hurting most under this Government are going to be in those seats the LibDems took from the Tories. They are going to have ZERO sway to stop Labour hurting their voters.

There's huge poential for buyers' remorse from those who voted LibDem and feel they are being shafted by this Government. LibDems are going to be on defence, not offence, next time out.

Quite so. Labour will be ripping those voters to shreds like the Xenomorph Queen did to Bishop.

Only voting Ripley-Tory can stop it.

ydoethur

rottenborough said:

ydoethur said:

I hadn't seen this bit.

Donald Trump has a table full of groceries next to him with before and after prices to illustrate inflation.

He then starts rambling wistfully about how nice some of them look, especially 'the Cheerios. I haven't seen Cheerios in a long time, I'm going to take them back to my cottage and have a lot of fun with them.'

What the actual fuckety fuck? I mean, sharks were bad enough, but - for real? He makes campaign speeches on the economy and says he hasn't seen cheerios in ages?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-cheerios-news-conference-b2597484.html

Never mind the Cheerios, what's this about "his cottage"?

Are we talking about JD Vance?

Casino_Royale

FF43 said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Lib Dems becoming second party I think depends on Labour winning further seats from the Conservatives, which by is by no means impossible. It does depend on what happens with Reform, Labour remaining a lot more popular relative to the Conservatives and continued Labour/LD/Green tactical voting.

On the other hand I could also Lib Dems winning more seats off the Conservatives as that party wins seats off Labour if Labour goes into decline. The Lib Dems will become challengers at Labour's expense in some Tory seats.

Why would this form of Labour government, pursuing classic socialism, appeal even further to Tory voters?

Some people have taken leave of their senses.

ydoethur

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Let's get real. The people who are going to be hurting most under this Government are going to be in those seats the LibDems took from the Tories. They are going to have ZERO sway to stop Labour hurting their voters.

There's huge poential for buyers' remorse from those who voted LibDem and feel they are being shafted by this Government. LibDems are going to be on defence, not offence, next time out.

Quite so. Labour will be ripping those voters to shreds like the Xenomorph Queen did to Bishop.

Only voting Ripley-Tory can stop it.

Was I meant to understand any of that?

Casino_Royale

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

The Conservatives might fade away, but they'd be replaced by a party on the same side of the political spectrum. About 40% support right wing parties, and that vote won't remain fortuitously split, forever. Either, it will gravitate to one party (and I think that's most likely to be the Conservatives, rather than Reform), or they'll vote tactically.

The current administration is also doing lots of things, even in its first 6 weeks, that will drive consolidation of that vote against it.

Lots of the people that will feel the pain from this Government will be natural centre-right voters, with a plenty good number of them in LD seats and LD target seats.

And, if you're in a seat like Llanelli, or Bradford South, the obvious thing for right wing voters to do now is to back Reform.

I expect political fragmentation to continue, but I cam see a path for Jenrick to rebuild a winning coalition on middle to higher income voters, aspirational private sector workers and those concerned about immigration.

MarqueeMark

Nunu5 said:

Wow, this is from GOP pollster
@FrankLuntz
:

“I’m trying to do a focus group tonight with undecided voters under the age of 27 for a major news outlet. And I can’t recruit young women to this, because they don’t exist as undecided voters,” he said.

https://x.com/Ritholtz/status/1824555443374391567

Tagged as "Trump committing political suicide".

MarqueeMark

Nunu5 said:

MarqueeMark said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDx_inVsD2M

"Doomsday for Republicans" - Senate race polling is very encouraging for Democrats.

Plus, Trump's lead in Florida is down to 3% (from 6%)

Isn't that good for Trump? Considering he gets the same nber of EC whether he wins FL by 1 vote or a million

Bit if Trump loses Florida by one vote, he loses the EC.

Cookie

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

The Conservatives might fade away, but they'd be replaced by a party on the same side of the political spectrum. About 40% support right wing parties, and that vote won't remain fortuitously split, forever. Either, it will gravitate to one party (and I think that's most likely to be the Conservatives, rather than Reform), or they'll vote tactically.

The current administration is also doing lots of things, even in its first 6 weeks, that will drive consolidation of that vote against it.

Lots of the people that will feel the pain from this Government will be natural centre-right voters, with a plenty good number of them in LD seats and LD target seats.

And, if you're in a seat like Llanelli, or Bradford South, the obvious thing for right wing voters to do now is to back Reform.

I expect political fragmentation to continue, but I cam see a path for Jenrick to rebuild a winning coalition on middle to higher income voters, aspirational private sector workers and those concerned about immigration.

Same way that Borisand SKS did - projection of those voters hopes onto a blank slate in the face of a rubbish alternative.

MarqueeMark

Sean_F said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

The Conservatives might fade away, but they'd be replaced by a party on the same side of the political spectrum. About 40% support right wing parties, and that vote won't remain fortuitously split, forever. Either, it will gravitate to one party (and I think that's most likely to be the Conservatives, rather than Reform), or they'll vote tactically.

The current administration is also doing lots of things, even in its first 6 weeks, that will drive consolidation of that vote against it.

Lots of the people that will feel the pain from this Government will be natural centre-right voters, with a plenty good number of them in LD seats and LD target seats.

And, if you're in a seat like Llanelli, or Bradford South, the obvious thing for right wing voters to do now is to back Reform.

Let's see what happens to Reform. They may easily go the way of the Referendum Party and UKIP. Expect to see the "personalities" within it start headbutting each other...

kjh

Nunu5 said:

MarqueeMark said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDx_inVsD2M

"Doomsday for Republicans" - Senate race polling is very encouraging for Democrats.

Plus, Trump's lead in Florida is down to 3% (from 6%)

Isn't that good for Trump? Considering he gets the same nber of EC whether he wins FL by 1 vote or a million

Not if Florida comes into play. He will have to move resources and campaigning to Florida and if Florida is lost he is almost certainly gone regardless of what happens elsewhere. So Florida may become a key battleground, something that was not envisaged a month or two ago.

FF43

Casino_Royale said:

FF43 said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Lib Dems becoming second party I think depends on Labour winning further seats from the Conservatives, which by is by no means impossible. It does depend on what happens with Reform, Labour remaining a lot more popular relative to the Conservatives and continued Labour/LD/Green tactical voting.

On the other hand I could also Lib Dems winning more seats off the Conservatives as that party wins seats off Labour if Labour goes into decline. The Lib Dems will become challengers at Labour's expense in some Tory seats.

Why would this form of Labour government, pursuing classic socialism, appeal even further to Tory voters?

Some people have taken leave of their senses.

When fleeing the bear you only need to outrun the others. This scenario depends on the Tories remaining at least as unpopular relative to Labour as now and continued anti Tory tactical voting. The first is possible and the second likely IMO. The Tory/Reform dynamic I'm less sure of.

rottenborough

MarqueeMark said:

Nunu5 said:

Wow, this is from GOP pollster
@FrankLuntz
:

“I’m trying to do a focus group tonight with undecided voters under the age of 27 for a major news outlet. And I can’t recruit young women to this, because they don’t exist as undecided voters,” he said.

https://x.com/Ritholtz/status/1824555443374391567

Tagged as "Trump committing political suicide".

And this was before Trump attacked veterans for being maimed or dead.

malcolmg

TheScreamingEagles said:

ydoethur said:

One other question we might want to ask ourselves is, how long does Ed Davey intend to stay as Leader of the Liberal Democrats? He's 58 and five years from now will be 63.

This is not trivial because I think I'm right in saying he is the only current member of the current LD parliamentary party to have served in cabinet.

Alistair Carmichael also served in the cabinet as Secretary of State for Scotland.

He was Malleus ScotNatorum during the Indyref.

A big arse more like

Cookie

Casino_Royale said:

FF43 said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Lib Dems becoming second party I think depends on Labour winning further seats from the Conservatives, which by is by no means impossible. It does depend on what happens with Reform, Labour remaining a lot more popular relative to the Conservatives and continued Labour/LD/Green tactical voting.

On the other hand I could also Lib Dems winning more seats off the Conservatives as that party wins seats off Labour if Labour goes into decline. The Lib Dems will become challengers at Labour's expense in some Tory seats.

Why would this form of Labour government, pursuing classic socialism, appeal even further to Tory voters?

Some people have taken leave of their senses.

Socialism itself isn't the problem. I don't think the majority of people have a principled objection to tax and spend. What tends to rile people is tax-and-piss-up-the-wall.

Nigelb

Nunu5 said:

Wow, this is from GOP pollster
@FrankLuntz
:

“I’m trying to do a focus group tonight with undecided voters under the age of 27 for a major news outlet. And I can’t recruit young women to this, because they don’t exist as undecided voters,” he said.

https://x.com/Ritholtz/status/1824555443374391567

That's not exactly a surprise considering who the GOP candidates are.

malcolmg

kjh said:

Cicero said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

Patel illicits a response from voters, more than any of the others. If the Tories want to remain relevant, then clearly there is only one option:

#Priti4Leader

Given Patel has the worst negatives with voters by far she is the LDs ideal Tory leader

All of the current Tory candidates are good for the Lib Dems. Patel is simply loathed, Badenoch is Patel without the broomstick accessory, but with a growing reputation for underhand dealings, Jenrick is conventional, but the cartoons nastiness makes him very Marmite even amongst Tory supporters and disliked elsewhere. Tugendhat is amiable but comes across as chinless, while Cleverly is a man for whom the very word "hapless" could have been coined. Even if the next Tory leader makes it to the next general election -not a given- the chances of any of these people becoming PM is vanishingly small. So the polls are right, why should anyone care?

Meanwhile there are some very serious new MPs on the Lib Dem benches (a surprising number of ex military, incidentally) and they have hit the ground running with perma-campaigns in held seats and plans to increase the national vote share and take the fight to the next tier of seats. I don´t think I have ever seen the party so fired up.

Meanwhile every day another more Tory members shuffle off this mortal coil and are not replaced. The leadership election should be the perfect time to recruit, but if anyone is doing that, it is not having much impact. If the Tories lose only another 25 seats to the Lib Dems, then Sir Edward Davey is the Leader of His Majesty´s Loyal Opposition and the Tories are done. At this point one can even wonder if the Tories are up for the fight. Europe doing to the Conservative and Unionist Party what Ireland and Asquithian High mindedness did to the Liberal Party.

Interestingly the LDs have continued campaigning in Guildford as if the election was still to happen. A constituency wide leaflet out and daily canvassing.

The Today programme this morning was covering the issue of Tories dying off rather than people moving Conservative as they get older. Didn't seem clear what that was based upon however.

Re the quality of the new MPs I only know a few, but the ones I know are quite impressive. Keep an eye on Chris Coghlan, a young Paddy Ashdown clone.

Pants

Casino_Royale

FF43 said:

Casino_Royale said:

FF43 said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Lib Dems becoming second party I think depends on Labour winning further seats from the Conservatives, which by is by no means impossible. It does depend on what happens with Reform, Labour remaining a lot more popular relative to the Conservatives and continued Labour/LD/Green tactical voting.

On the other hand I could also Lib Dems winning more seats off the Conservatives as that party wins seats off Labour if Labour goes into decline. The Lib Dems will become challengers at Labour's expense in some Tory seats.

Why would this form of Labour government, pursuing classic socialism, appeal even further to Tory voters?

Some people have taken leave of their senses.

When fleeing the bear you only need to outrun the others. This scenario depends on the Tories remaining at least as unpopular relative to Labour as now and continued anti Tory tactical voting. The first is possible and the second likely IMO. The Tory/Reform dynamic I'm less sure of.

Why would they?

This new government is doing even worse on the core issues of concern to these voters than the previous administration.

Nigelb

ydoethur said:

Casino_Royale said:

MarqueeMark said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Let's get real. The people who are going to be hurting most under this Government are going to be in those seats the LibDems took from the Tories. They are going to have ZERO sway to stop Labour hurting their voters.

There's huge poential for buyers' remorse from those who voted LibDem and feel they are being shafted by this Government. LibDems are going to be on defence, not offence, next time out.

Quite so. Labour will be ripping those voters to shreds like the Xenomorph Queen did to Bishop.

Only voting Ripley-Tory can stop it.

Was I meant to understand any of that?

Essentially that Conservative recovery plans are still at the bizarre fantasy stage.

Casino_Royale

Cookie said:

Casino_Royale said:

FF43 said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Lib Dems becoming second party I think depends on Labour winning further seats from the Conservatives, which by is by no means impossible. It does depend on what happens with Reform, Labour remaining a lot more popular relative to the Conservatives and continued Labour/LD/Green tactical voting.

On the other hand I could also Lib Dems winning more seats off the Conservatives as that party wins seats off Labour if Labour goes into decline. The Lib Dems will become challengers at Labour's expense in some Tory seats.

Why would this form of Labour government, pursuing classic socialism, appeal even further to Tory voters?

Some people have taken leave of their senses.

Socialism itself isn't the problem. I don't think the majority of people have a principled objection to tax and spend. What tends to rile people is tax-and-piss-up-the-wall.

I think socialism is the problem.

I don't think that's how most British people are wired. They're open to a little more tax on public services if it delivers better outcomes, a bit like paying more for good service, but it ends there.

FF43

Casino_Royale said:

FF43 said:

Stuartinromford said:

As for Lib Dems overtaking Conservatives, that needs about 25 gains by the Peril on the Yellow-Blue battlefield. That means overturning majorities of 8000/8% or so, and winning in places like Surrey East and New Forest West.

A few months ago, that would have seemed crazy, but if the Lib Dems can properly lean into their new status as the party of Nice Britain, kind of like the Aussie Teals, who knows? The Conservatives have got to do something about those seats, because 70 Lib Dems are already a pretty effective block on a Conservative majority.

Lib Dems becoming second party I think depends on Labour winning further seats from the Conservatives, which by is by no means impossible. It does depend on what happens with Reform, Labour remaining a lot more popular relative to the Conservatives and continued Labour/LD/Green tactical voting.

On the other hand I could also Lib Dems winning more seats off the Conservatives as that party wins seats off Labour if Labour goes into decline. The Lib Dems will become challengers at Labour's expense in some Tory seats.

Why would this form of Labour government, pursuing classic socialism, appeal even further to Tory voters?

Some people have taken leave of their senses.

This is a genuine question, for all Tories. Why do you think the Tories had their worst result in terms of seats since 1761?

pigeon

The fate of the Tories is what happens to you when you cease to be anything resembling a broad based entity seeking to appeal to the wider electorate, and become a lobby group consisting mostly of, and only interested in, one sectional interest. In this case, of course, propertied, miserly old people with fat old fashioned occupational pensions. The average age of a Tory voter is 63 for a reason.

The only reason for anyone significantly younger than that to vote for them is if they're worried that Labour might raise IHT and other taxes on residential housing, i.e. do them out of a chunk of the windfall they're expecting when Mum and Dad join the choir celestial. The Tories are neither use nor ornament to anybody else.

Tim_in_Ruislip

Scott_xP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Talking about North Britain, the SNP are going full Corbynite.

Angus Robertson met with the Israeli deputy ambassador and that led to a backlash including Humza Yousaf's wife having a go at Angus Robertson.

Then John Mason MSP went full Barty defending the meeting.

If Israel wanted to commit genocide, they would have killed ten times as many.

https://x.com/JohnMasonMSP/status/1824560329352941820

@holyroodmandy

Be interesting to see if the SNP end up suspending the whip from John Mason but not from Angus Robertson.

Thing is, neither the Palestinians, nor Israelis give a flying fuck about what the Scottish people/government thinks.

The Government in Westminster and wider British opinion is viewed as pretty irrelevant, also.

We're fundamentally blamed for Balfour, the mandate period and how it came to an end. Just about the only thing all sides can agree on is that our opinions don't matter.

Nigelb

ydoethur said:

I hadn't seen this bit.

Donald Trump has a table full of groceries next to him with before and after prices to illustrate inflation.

He then starts rambling wistfully about how nice some of them look, especially 'the Cheerios. I haven't seen Cheerios in a long time, I'm going to take them back to my cottage and have a lot of fun with them.'

What the actual fuckety fuck? I mean, sharks were bad enough, but - for real? He makes campaign speeches on the economy and says he hasn't seen cheerios in ages?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-cheerios-news-conference-b2597484.html

Whoever it was that placed boxes of Fruit Loops and Cheerios next to him may have been trying to send a couple of messages ?

malcolmg

Scott_xP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Talking about North Britain, the SNP are going full Corbynite.

Angus Robertson met with the Israeli deputy ambassador and that led to a backlash including Humza Yousaf's wife having a go at Angus Robertson.

Then John Mason MSP went full Barty defending the meeting.

If Israel wanted to commit genocide, they would have killed ten times as many.

https://x.com/JohnMasonMSP/status/1824560329352941820

@holyroodmandy

Be interesting to see if the SNP end up suspending the whip from John Mason but not from Angus Robertson.

Angus will never ban himself that is for sure, the politbureau may want rid of Mason though as he can actually think for himself.

ydoethur

malcolmg said:

kjh said:

Cicero said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

Patel illicits a response from voters, more than any of the others. If the Tories want to remain relevant, then clearly there is only one option:

#Priti4Leader

Given Patel has the worst negatives with voters by far she is the LDs ideal Tory leader

All of the current Tory candidates are good for the Lib Dems. Patel is simply loathed, Badenoch is Patel without the broomstick accessory, but with a growing reputation for underhand dealings, Jenrick is conventional, but the cartoons nastiness makes him very Marmite even amongst Tory supporters and disliked elsewhere. Tugendhat is amiable but comes across as chinless, while Cleverly is a man for whom the very word "hapless" could have been coined. Even if the next Tory leader makes it to the next general election -not a given- the chances of any of these people becoming PM is vanishingly small. So the polls are right, why should anyone care?

Meanwhile there are some very serious new MPs on the Lib Dem benches (a surprising number of ex military, incidentally) and they have hit the ground running with perma-campaigns in held seats and plans to increase the national vote share and take the fight to the next tier of seats. I don´t think I have ever seen the party so fired up.

Meanwhile every day another more Tory members shuffle off this mortal coil and are not replaced. The leadership election should be the perfect time to recruit, but if anyone is doing that, it is not having much impact. If the Tories lose only another 25 seats to the Lib Dems, then Sir Edward Davey is the Leader of His Majesty´s Loyal Opposition and the Tories are done. At this point one can even wonder if the Tories are up for the fight. Europe doing to the Conservative and Unionist Party what Ireland and Asquithian High mindedness did to the Liberal Party.

Interestingly the LDs have continued campaigning in Guildford as if the election was still to happen. A constituency wide leaflet out and daily canvassing.

The Today programme this morning was covering the issue of Tories dying off rather than people moving Conservative as they get older. Didn't seem clear what that was based upon however.

Re the quality of the new MPs I only know a few, but the ones I know are quite impressive. Keep an eye on Chris Coghlan, a young Paddy Ashdown clone.

Pants

Are they needed to cover this big arse?

malcolmg

ydoethur said:

malcolmg said:

kjh said:

Cicero said:

HYUFD said:

SandyRentool said:

Patel illicits a response from voters, more than any of the others. If the Tories want to remain relevant, then clearly there is only one option:

#Priti4Leader

Given Patel has the worst negatives with voters by far she is the LDs ideal Tory leader

All of the current Tory candidates are good for the Lib Dems. Patel is simply loathed, Badenoch is Patel without the broomstick accessory, but with a growing reputation for underhand dealings, Jenrick is conventional, but the cartoons nastiness makes him very Marmite even amongst Tory supporters and disliked elsewhere. Tugendhat is amiable but comes across as chinless, while Cleverly is a man for whom the very word "hapless" could have been coined. Even if the next Tory leader makes it to the next general election -not a given- the chances of any of these people becoming PM is vanishingly small. So the polls are right, why should anyone care?

Meanwhile there are some very serious new MPs on the Lib Dem benches (a surprising number of ex military, incidentally) and they have hit the ground running with perma-campaigns in held seats and plans to increase the national vote share and take the fight to the next tier of seats. I don´t think I have ever seen the party so fired up.

Meanwhile every day another more Tory members shuffle off this mortal coil and are not replaced. The leadership election should be the perfect time to recruit, but if anyone is doing that, it is not having much impact. If the Tories lose only another 25 seats to the Lib Dems, then Sir Edward Davey is the Leader of His Majesty´s Loyal Opposition and the Tories are done. At this point one can even wonder if the Tories are up for the fight. Europe doing to the Conservative and Unionist Party what Ireland and Asquithian High mindedness did to the Liberal Party.

Interestingly the LDs have continued campaigning in Guildford as if the election was still to happen. A constituency wide leaflet out and daily canvassing.

The Today programme this morning was covering the issue of Tories dying off rather than people moving Conservative as they get older. Didn't seem clear what that was based upon however.

Re the quality of the new MPs I only know a few, but the ones I know are quite impressive. Keep an eye on Chris Coghlan, a young Paddy Ashdown clone.

Pants

Are they needed to cover this big arse?

If kept up yes, though having never seen him it may not be big