Howdy, Stranger!

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

Love’s Labour’s Lost – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,046
edited September 25 in General
Love’s Labour’s Lost – politicalbetting.com

Labour and Keir Starmer's favourability ratings have fallen to a new post-election lowKeir StarmerFavourable: 30% (-14 from 8 Jul)Unfavourable: 60% (+13)Labour partyFavourable: 32% (-15)Unfavourable: 59% (+13)https://t.co/NxrjsKJPYR pic.twitter.com/XH8yDNWorN

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • Hopefully you'll all spot the subtle Shakespeare reference.
  • Fysics_TeacherFysics_Teacher Posts: 6,267
    edited September 25
    So where did @tse 's comment go?

    Now I look more like an idiot than normal.

    Edit: And now it's back: thanks @TSE
  • So where did @tse 's comment go?

    Now I look more like an idiot than normal.
    It's back.
  • FPT
    GIN1138 said:

    *Important post and possible topic for a thread header @TheScreamingEagles ? ) *

    Since Election '24 we've had 8 VI opinion polls from just 4 companies: We Think. Stonehaven. BMG. More In Common.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

    By this point in this point in the 2019-2024 Parliament we'd had 11 VI polls from 8 companies: BMG, Opinium, YouGov, Survation, IPSOS/MORI, Redfield/Whilton, Survatna/ComRes...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election

    If we We Think, Stonehaven and More In Common had't entered the fray since early 2020 we would only have had 2 opinion polls from BMG so far this Parliament?

    It's almost starting to feel like the biggest pollsters are deliberately refusing to conduct voting intention polls after Labour was elected in on 4th July 2024?

    Surely that couldn't be the case, right? 🤷‍♂️

    What's going on?

    Pollsters are reviewing their methodologies (not just for VI but for the MRPs).

    The sad reality is for the pollsters is that political polling is less than one per cent of their turnover but it is the one they are judged on.

    I do know of one pollster who is genuinely thinking about pulling out of the political polling market given how few media organisations are willing to pay for polls now.

    If you think about it, out of the last five general elections the polling industry has only got one election spot on.

    We will be getting an Ipsos poll this week though.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,185
    There’s also this poll that presents a somewhat different narrative…

    Labour lead at 12pts
    Westminster voting intention

    LAB: 33% (-1)
    CON: 21% (-3)
    REF: 18% (+3)
    LDEM: 13% (-)
    GRN: 7% (-)

    via @techneUK, 19 Sep

    https://x.com/britainelects/status/1838597568508383391
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417
    OT

    This matches the mood out in the real world - I’ve had jokes from non-political people about Starmer & Labour in the way that happened under the previous government.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731

    FPT

    GIN1138 said:

    *Important post and possible topic for a thread header @TheScreamingEagles ? ) *

    Since Election '24 we've had 8 VI opinion polls from just 4 companies: We Think. Stonehaven. BMG. More In Common.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

    By this point in this point in the 2019-2024 Parliament we'd had 11 VI polls from 8 companies: BMG, Opinium, YouGov, Survation, IPSOS/MORI, Redfield/Whilton, Survatna/ComRes...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election

    If we We Think, Stonehaven and More In Common had't entered the fray since early 2020 we would only have had 2 opinion polls from BMG so far this Parliament?

    It's almost starting to feel like the biggest pollsters are deliberately refusing to conduct voting intention polls after Labour was elected in on 4th July 2024?

    Surely that couldn't be the case, right? 🤷‍♂️

    What's going on?

    Pollsters are reviewing their methodologies (not just for VI but for the MRPs).

    The sad reality is for the pollsters is that political polling is less than one per cent of their turnover but it is the one they are judged on.

    I do know of one pollster who is genuinely thinking about pulling out of the political polling market given how few media organisations are willing to pay for polls now.

    If you think about it, out of the last five general elections the polling industry has only got one election spot on.

    We will be getting an Ipsos poll this week though.
    Some people are addicted to polls, though.

    They are very Mori-sh.
    That's certainly what We Think.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,042

    Hopefully you'll all spot the subtle Shakespeare reference.

    I don't think I get it.
    "Love Labour's lost" or "Labour's love lost" make more sense to me.

    Or is the first apostrophe of the grocer variety?
  • kamski said:

    Hopefully you'll all spot the subtle Shakespeare reference.

    I don't think I get it.
    "Love Labour's lost" or "Labour's love lost" make more sense to me.

    Or is the first apostrophe of the grocer variety?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love's_Labour's_Lost#Title
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,185
    Receiving gifts scandal 2%

    !!!
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 21,950

    FPT

    GIN1138 said:

    *Important post and possible topic for a thread header @TheScreamingEagles ? ) *

    Since Election '24 we've had 8 VI opinion polls from just 4 companies: We Think. Stonehaven. BMG. More In Common.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

    By this point in this point in the 2019-2024 Parliament we'd had 11 VI polls from 8 companies: BMG, Opinium, YouGov, Survation, IPSOS/MORI, Redfield/Whilton, Survatna/ComRes...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election

    If we We Think, Stonehaven and More In Common had't entered the fray since early 2020 we would only have had 2 opinion polls from BMG so far this Parliament?

    It's almost starting to feel like the biggest pollsters are deliberately refusing to conduct voting intention polls after Labour was elected in on 4th July 2024?

    Surely that couldn't be the case, right? 🤷‍♂️

    What's going on?

    Pollsters are reviewing their methodologies (not just for VI but for the MRPs).

    The sad reality is for the pollsters is that political polling is less than one per cent of their turnover but it is the one they are judged on.

    I do know of one pollster who is genuinely thinking about pulling out of the political polling market given how few media organisations are willing to pay for polls now.

    If you think about it, out of the last five general elections the polling industry has only got one election spot on.

    We will be getting an Ipsos poll this week though.
    OK, thanks TSE. I shall wait for the return to the fray of the biggest pollsters with great interest 👍
  • FPT

    GIN1138 said:

    *Important post and possible topic for a thread header @TheScreamingEagles ? ) *

    Since Election '24 we've had 8 VI opinion polls from just 4 companies: We Think. Stonehaven. BMG. More In Common.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

    By this point in this point in the 2019-2024 Parliament we'd had 11 VI polls from 8 companies: BMG, Opinium, YouGov, Survation, IPSOS/MORI, Redfield/Whilton, Survatna/ComRes...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election

    If we We Think, Stonehaven and More In Common had't entered the fray since early 2020 we would only have had 2 opinion polls from BMG so far this Parliament?

    It's almost starting to feel like the biggest pollsters are deliberately refusing to conduct voting intention polls after Labour was elected in on 4th July 2024?

    Surely that couldn't be the case, right? 🤷‍♂️

    What's going on?

    Pollsters are reviewing their methodologies (not just for VI but for the MRPs).

    The sad reality is for the pollsters is that political polling is less than one per cent of their turnover but it is the one they are judged on.

    I do know of one pollster who is genuinely thinking about pulling out of the political polling market given how few media organisations are willing to pay for polls now.

    If you think about it, out of the last five general elections the polling industry has only got one election spot on.

    We will be getting an Ipsos poll this week though.
    I wonder to what extent the polls affect voting patterns: for example is a significant number people who were keen on seeing the back of the Tories in July but not that keen on Labour saw the huge lead SKS had and assumed that they didn't need to cast a vote after all. In the same vein May's apparent lead over Corbyn may have encouraged those who would not have actually wanted to see him as PM to believe that it was safe to vote Labour.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,000
    edited September 25
    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 7,896
    edited September 25
    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,123
    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    Wasn't really crushed, though, was it? It sort of very slowly petered out.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,446
    Since it seems to have been forgotten by some, here's the Guardian's write-up of the Red Rag scandal, involving McBride, Whelan, Draper and Magure:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/apr/15/derek-draper-mcbride-smear-emails-redrag

    Right from the heart of Brown's (and Labour's) No. 10 operation.
  • Worth noting that most of the government actions there have got a net thumbs up from the voters.

    And of the two that don't, one (the prisoner release) is a consequence of the previous government not building prisons. Rishi just called the election before that bomb went off.

    And the other is means-testing WFA, which remains repulsive but right.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 7,896

    Receiving gifts scandal 2%

    !!!

    It would be nice if that percentage was reflected in the proportion of PB posts about the issue ;)
  • There’s also this poll that presents a somewhat different narrative…

    Labour lead at 12pts
    Westminster voting intention

    LAB: 33% (-1)
    CON: 21% (-3)
    REF: 18% (+3)
    LDEM: 13% (-)
    GRN: 7% (-)

    via @techneUK, 19 Sep

    https://x.com/britainelects/status/1838597568508383391

    That poll was widely discussed at the time
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730

    Hopefully you'll all spot the subtle Shakespeare reference.

    "Welcome the sour cup of prosperity !"
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 7,896

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    Wasn't really crushed, though, was it? It sort of very slowly petered out.
    You're kinda right.

    Oddly enough, the perception of it being crushed has been cultivated by the Right wing media who made such a fuss about "two-tier" policing. The rest of the country watched these thugs getting locked up with a great deal of satisfaction.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,446

    Sandpit said:

    rkrkrk said:

    ...

    Roger said:

    There was a time when you could recommend PB as a place for insightful political discussion from some very bright and articulate posters. Some of them are still here but they're being drowned out.

    Couldn't we have a permanent ongoing thread dedicated to how long Starmer is likely to survive and anyone who wants to can go into as much detail as they like about how shit he is?

    Labour are in power. They have to make decisions. Those decisions will get criticised, good or bad.

    It's called supporting the party in power.

    Live with it.
    Criticism of Starmer, Reeves and the Government in general is fair game, certainly when errors or missteps have been made.. Although a couple of posters push articles, quite often from the Telegraph which follow the principle of Betteridge's law. Essentially it is a fake news question, the answer to which is "no" which sets out a false narrative. The pubs thing yesterday was a case in point. The critique is for policy that either hasn't been implemented or quite likely never will.

    The Field Marshal will be along later to make insightful posts like "Reeves is a disaster". Urquhart and William Glenn will cite an article from Allister Heath as gospel and Leon will troll with anecdotes from his family WhatsApp group. All pretty meagre gruel.

    The biggest genuine criticism of this government isn't what it has done or might do in the mind of Nick Ferrari, but the fact that there is so little to show for the last ten weeks..

    I'd strongly argue that the gifts mess is the biggest genuine criticism. However much Labour try to deny it, it was an utterly self-inflicted wound. And there has been plenty of denial on here about it.

    As for articles: yes. But the same thing happened to the Tory governments as well. And worse. Labour - and its supporters who agreed - should hang their heads in shame for things like Cameron and the pig's head, or trying to connect Cameron's son's death with drugs use.

    Labour cannot say they want a nicer politics now, after they way they behaved over the last fifteen years (and, in fact, before then, given Brown's constant undermining of Blair pre 2007...). They use the media as much as anyone else.

    Some Tory supporters (or, perhaps, more accurately, anti-Labour) are going too far in writing off this government after a few weeks. I've said so. But I'll also say that thanks to some simple mistakes, Labour have had f-all honeymoon period. There are valid criticisms to be made about Starmer's government so far, and indeed Starmer himself, but too many Labour supporters don't want to hear them.
    The pigs head thing was Lord Ashcroft and Isabelle Oakshot? Genuinely never heard anything about Cameron son death - that sounds vile.
    The coterie around Gordon Brown seemed to have no barriers at all. Vile indeed.
    Damian McBride had to spend a decade doing PR for a Catholic aid charity, on a very average salary, to finally learn in his 40s how to be nice to people.
    Ironically, Guido Fawkes saved the Labour Party in this.

    For those that don’t know. Dolly Draper and Damian McBride, while working at No.10, we’re planning to setup a website pushing deliberately fake stories about opponents of Labour. Not just the Conservatives - they were going after Lib Dems as well.

    The story leaked because the two were incompetent. Before they had actually done anything.

    If they had gone ahead, the legal exposure would have been incredible. Knowing making up and publishing malicious stories about people is an extra special kind of libel in the British courts. The damages would have wiped the Labour Party out, financially, if found to be corporately involved.

    In addition, we’d have had the PM swing called to the witness box to state that he had no idea that McBride (personal political hit man to the PM) and Draper were acting without his knowledge. While sitting writhing feet of him at No. 10

    So Guido revealing this before it went live saved the Labour Party from an utter disaster.
    Some of the stories did come out though - e.g. through Maguire's shittiness.

    It was one of the events that made me delurk onto PB all those years ago. So you might say it had negative consequences in many ways... ;)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731
    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.

    Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,123
    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,123
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    Wasn't really crushed, though, was it? It sort of very slowly petered out.
    You're kinda right.

    Oddly enough, the perception of it being crushed has been cultivated by the Right wing media who made such a fuss about "two-tier" policing. The rest of the country watched these thugs getting locked up with a great deal of satisfaction.
    Just the usual yobs and football hooligans and those spoiling for a riot/fight.
  • The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    Gallup aren’t gold standard.

    Their methodology is flawed, they use all voters rather than registered voters.

    It’s why their polls were such outliers in 2020.
  • Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,123
    edited September 25

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    Gallup aren’t gold standard.

    Their methodology is flawed, they use all voters rather than registered voters.

    It’s why their polls were such outliers in 2020.
    Gallup are a well-established and reputable pollster.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,123

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Another fart.

    For some reason your posts make me want to defend Labour.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417
    Foxy said:

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.

    Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.

    Spending political capital like that, to no purpose, suggests the lack of an overall plan.

    Which is what New Labour definitely had.

    I can’t see why they didn’t tell the OBR to work double shifts and get the budget out earlier. If, indeed, that is the blocker.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,018

    Foxy said:

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.

    Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.

    Spending political capital like that, to no purpose, suggests the lack of an overall plan.

    Which is what New Labour definitely had.

    I can’t see why they didn’t tell the OBR to work double shifts and get the budget out earlier. If, indeed, that is the blocker.
    I don't know if Sunak meant for this to happen, but a July election really has buggered Labour.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year.
    That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.

    So no big deal.

    You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
  • Foxy said:

    FPT

    GIN1138 said:

    *Important post and possible topic for a thread header @TheScreamingEagles ? ) *

    Since Election '24 we've had 8 VI opinion polls from just 4 companies: We Think. Stonehaven. BMG. More In Common.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election

    By this point in this point in the 2019-2024 Parliament we'd had 11 VI polls from 8 companies: BMG, Opinium, YouGov, Survation, IPSOS/MORI, Redfield/Whilton, Survatna/ComRes...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election

    If we We Think, Stonehaven and More In Common had't entered the fray since early 2020 we would only have had 2 opinion polls from BMG so far this Parliament?

    It's almost starting to feel like the biggest pollsters are deliberately refusing to conduct voting intention polls after Labour was elected in on 4th July 2024?

    Surely that couldn't be the case, right? 🤷‍♂️

    What's going on?

    Pollsters are reviewing their methodologies (not just for VI but for the MRPs).

    The sad reality is for the pollsters is that political polling is less than one per cent of their turnover but it is the one they are judged on.

    I do know of one pollster who is genuinely thinking about pulling out of the political polling market given how few media organisations are willing to pay for polls now.

    If you think about it, out of the last five general elections the polling industry has only got one election spot on.

    We will be getting an Ipsos poll this week though.
    Some people are addicted to polls, though.

    They are very Mori-sh.
    That's certainly what We Think.
    You may think that guv but please don't speak for the whole populus.
  • Nigelb said:

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year.
    That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.

    So no big deal.

    You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
    Are you sure? Has anyone ever been brave enough to suggest it is a close race yet?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,185

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    They are, but the question that I have is whether Trump being Trump breaks the relationship between some of these and votes cast.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    Gallup aren’t gold standard.

    Their methodology is flawed, they use all voters rather than registered voters.

    It’s why their polls were such outliers in 2020.
    Gallup are a well-established and reputable pollster.
    They're ...OK.

    44th on 538's pollster rating list.
  • Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730
    Another data point on the real threat to your pets in the US.Heritage

    Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts told university colleagues he killed a neighbor's dog with a shovel
    https://x.com/_cingraham/status/1838571477618274475

  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Another fart.

    For some reason your posts make me want to defend Labour.
    You may find yourself wanting to do that increasingly often. The next, what, 3 years are going to see a concerted threat to the Lab-Con duopoly from a slightly weird triumvirate of Reform (who’ll be the loudest and most commentated on), Greens (who’ll stand to gain big-time from Labour disillusionment- essentially taking the role the Lib Dems had in 2001-2010), and the Lib Dems who will go about their job more quietly but will be hard at work in their regions, particularly if Jenrick wins the leadership.

    The Green Party - totally undeserved in my view given their nonsensical policy mix of crank student lefty and eco-NIMBY - are going to be big winners in the next few council election rounds. Possibly parliamentary byelections too, if the opportunity arises.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417
    tlg86 said:

    Foxy said:

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.

    Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.

    Spending political capital like that, to no purpose, suggests the lack of an overall plan.

    Which is what New Labour definitely had.

    I can’t see why they didn’t tell the OBR to work double shifts and get the budget out earlier. If, indeed, that is the blocker.
    I don't know if Sunak meant for this to happen, but a July election really has buggered Labour.
    Blair and Brown had their plan ready far early than a few months before 1997
  • Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    Wasn't really crushed, though, was it? It sort of very slowly petered out.
    You're kinda right.

    Oddly enough, the perception of it being crushed has been cultivated by the Right wing media who made such a fuss about "two-tier" policing. The rest of the country watched these thugs getting locked up with a great deal of satisfaction.
    I'm not sure. There does seem to be widespread concern about two tier justice, and maybe Labour's critics have been too quick to move on. However, as you imply, what irks people is not rioters being sent down so much as others ‘getting off’.
  • Nigelb said:

    Another data point on the real threat to your pets in the US.Heritage

    Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts told university colleagues he killed a neighbor's dog with a shovel
    https://x.com/_cingraham/status/1838571477618274475

    Any Haitian background perchance?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957
    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    Labour want people to believe one thing in 2024 and one thing in 2029 so they can win the election for a second term.

    2024: Things are in a bad way but Labour has a plan for fixing it.
    2029: The government inherited a mess but is fixing it. Don't stop now.

    The big risk for the government now is people think it is a mess but Labour aren't doing anything different from their predecessors.

    I actually think this is incorrect, or it is too early to say, but it is what people appear to think.

    The three things that have created all the noise don't matter, except in the context of this belief: WFA-gate, Freebie-gate and Sue-Gray-gate
  • tlg86 said:

    Foxy said:

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.

    Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.

    Spending political capital like that, to no purpose, suggests the lack of an overall plan.

    Which is what New Labour definitely had.

    I can’t see why they didn’t tell the OBR to work double shifts and get the budget out earlier. If, indeed, that is the blocker.
    I don't know if Sunak meant for this to happen, but a July election really has buggered Labour.
    Rishi did stop the OBR preparing for a new government, aiui.

    Rishi's snap election also caught out Tony Blair, whose new book On Leadership was probably intended as a roadmap for Keir Starmer.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,291

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    Some of us have been saying for months that the economy is the most important issue of the election.

    The vast majority of Americans, with the exception of the upper class top 10%, are a long way from feeling better off than they were four years ago.
  • Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
    Go back to his first outings as LotO. He was terrible, stiff and stilted. Or his early shadow cabinet, which had some hopeless people in the top roles. Annalise Dodds as shadow Chancellor? I mean, she's not stupid, but really?
  • Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
    Relative comparison with a set of dunces in the job previously?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,123
    Nigelb said:

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year.
    That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.

    So no big deal.

    You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
    It's no conspiracy that anything or anyone that looks vaguely pro Trump is bullied or trash-talked. Which means many stay silent.

    Fact.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417
    TimS said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Another fart.

    For some reason your posts make me want to defend Labour.
    You may find yourself wanting to do that increasingly often. The next, what, 3 years are going to see a concerted threat to the Lab-Con duopoly from a slightly weird triumvirate of Reform (who’ll be the loudest and most commentated on), Greens (who’ll stand to gain big-time from Labour disillusionment- essentially taking the role the Lib Dems had in 2001-2010), and the Lib Dems who will go about their job more quietly but will be hard at work in their regions, particularly if Jenrick wins the leadership.

    The Green Party - totally undeserved in my view given their nonsensical policy mix of crank student lefty and eco-NIMBY - are going to be big winners in the next few council election rounds. Possibly parliamentary byelections too, if the opportunity arises.
    I agree.

    If things don't change, we could easily go into the next election with Labour, Conservative, Lib Dems, Greens and Reform on similar national percentages. With regional variations and FPTP, the betting opportunities....
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,368

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
    Go back to his first outings as LotO. He was terrible, stiff and stilted. Or his early shadow cabinet, which had some hopeless people in the top roles. Annalise Dodds as shadow Chancellor? I mean, she's not stupid, but really?
    He was dreadful on Today earlier. The constant “my boy” nonsense.

    Somewhere there is a toolmaker turning in his grave that his son who banged on about not being able to afford to pay the phone bill and talked about sacrifices couldn’t sacrifice a few years of going to watch the football.

    What would he think of his “boy”.

    He also said he needed someone to buy him clothes as leader of opposition as he was so focussed on getting to win the election however he won’t need to be bought clothes now he is PM.

    So, even if it was a time saving issue he could still have given a staffer his credit card surely?

    And if he was too busy as LotO does he not think maybe he might be busier as PM?

    Maybe I just don’t understand his TOP LAWYER genius arguments.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 59,123
    TimS said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Another fart.

    For some reason your posts make me want to defend Labour.
    You may find yourself wanting to do that increasingly often. The next, what, 3 years are going to see a concerted threat to the Lab-Con duopoly from a slightly weird triumvirate of Reform (who’ll be the loudest and most commentated on), Greens (who’ll stand to gain big-time from Labour disillusionment- essentially taking the role the Lib Dems had in 2001-2010), and the Lib Dems who will go about their job more quietly but will be hard at work in their regions, particularly if Jenrick wins the leadership.

    The Green Party - totally undeserved in my view given their nonsensical policy mix of crank student lefty and eco-NIMBY - are going to be big winners in the next few council election rounds. Possibly parliamentary byelections too, if the opportunity arises.
    My greatest fear is a hard-left government takes over at some point in the next 25 years and destroys both my property and my pension.

    They'd only need to be in power for 6 months to do permanent damage. And I'd rate it as a 20% shot over that timeframe, at present.
  • Nigelb said:

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year.
    That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.

    So no big deal.

    You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
    It's no conspiracy that anything or anyone that looks vaguely pro Trump is bullied or trash-talked. Which means many stay silent.

    Fact.
    No-one posting stuff supporting Trump winning the election gets bullied or trash talked.
    Posters who post stuff supporting Trumps views get challenged, perhaps trash talkeed but not bullied. Same as anyone posting marxist or Putinist stuff get challenged and perhaps trash talked.

    Its what happens on a debating forum.
  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 983
    If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,185
    edited September 25

    TimS said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Another fart.

    For some reason your posts make me want to defend Labour.
    You may find yourself wanting to do that increasingly often. The next, what, 3 years are going to see a concerted threat to the Lab-Con duopoly from a slightly weird triumvirate of Reform (who’ll be the loudest and most commentated on), Greens (who’ll stand to gain big-time from Labour disillusionment- essentially taking the role the Lib Dems had in 2001-2010), and the Lib Dems who will go about their job more quietly but will be hard at work in their regions, particularly if Jenrick wins the leadership.

    The Green Party - totally undeserved in my view given their nonsensical policy mix of crank student lefty and eco-NIMBY - are going to be big winners in the next few council election rounds. Possibly parliamentary byelections too, if the opportunity arises.
    I agree.

    If things don't change, we could easily go into the next election with Labour, Conservative, Lib Dems, Greens and Reform on similar national percentages. With regional variations and FPTP, the betting opportunities....
    You can get very long odds on LibDem, Green or Reform UK getting most seats at the next general election. If your prediction here is true, those have to be worth at least trading bets.

    EDIT: LibDems at 100/1, Greens at 500/1, Reform UK only at 7/1 though.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
    Go back to his first outings as LotO. He was terrible, stiff and stilted. Or his early shadow cabinet, which had some hopeless people in the top roles. Annalise Dodds as shadow Chancellor? I mean, she's not stupid, but really?
    That's learning, plus probably a case of first week nerves. As to hopeless people in the shadow cabinet, I think you'll find that when eventual winners take over, they always start with what the political power broking that got them there implied. Then, gradually ease out the problems. This happened with Blair*, Cameron and now Starmer.

    *Kinnock and Smith. While not winners, they did much of the spade work for Blair, and went through a similar uphill struggle to move the party and Shadow cabinet to what they wanted.

    I don't think Starmer is especially bad. I don't think he seems to be especially good, either, though. He managed the politics of the Labour Party well enough - experience there.

    But when it comes to being in government... The Sue Gray issue is the biggest problem I see. Seems to be a pound shop Campbell or an actual Dominic Cummings, after the hype.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 120,995
    The one thing you can say about Winter fuel allowance being restricted from a Labour perspective is it mainly hits pensioners who are mostly Tory voters. Even if voters as a whole still disapprove of the restrictions.

    Starmer's favourable rating now below that of the Labour party as a whole is also not good for him
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
    Possibly the other side of the coin from another criticism of him, that he's changeable.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 5,902

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    It also highlights how Gore managed to lose the 2000 election even with a very good economy and positive sentiment.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    https://apnews.com/article/us-port-strike-threat-longshoremen-savannah-georgia-d80689a9ab83fb3345df029e91b0abc8

    Longshoreman strike looks nailed on for October. Slated to disrupt supply chains and be not great for incumbents
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417

    TimS said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Another fart.

    For some reason your posts make me want to defend Labour.
    You may find yourself wanting to do that increasingly often. The next, what, 3 years are going to see a concerted threat to the Lab-Con duopoly from a slightly weird triumvirate of Reform (who’ll be the loudest and most commentated on), Greens (who’ll stand to gain big-time from Labour disillusionment- essentially taking the role the Lib Dems had in 2001-2010), and the Lib Dems who will go about their job more quietly but will be hard at work in their regions, particularly if Jenrick wins the leadership.

    The Green Party - totally undeserved in my view given their nonsensical policy mix of crank student lefty and eco-NIMBY - are going to be big winners in the next few council election rounds. Possibly parliamentary byelections too, if the opportunity arises.
    I agree.

    If things don't change, we could easily go into the next election with Labour, Conservative, Lib Dems, Greens and Reform on similar national percentages. With regional variations and FPTP, the betting opportunities....
    You can get very long odds on LibDem, Green or Reform UK getting most seats at the next general election. If your prediction here is true, those have to be worth at least trading bets.
    I'd say it is a possibility. Conservatives and Labour stripped back to their core supporters. "Time for a change" indeed.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 120,995
    Nigelb said:

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year.
    That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.

    So no big deal.

    You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
    The polls were clear in the primaries that Haley led Biden and Harris more than Trump did and Haley was significantly ahead with Independent swing voters of Trump in the GOP primaries especially.

    However polls also showed had she been nominee and Trump gone third party that handed the election back to the Democrats again
  • Icarus said:

    If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.

    Indeed. One thing alluded to in TSE's header is Mrs Thatcher's first act, doubling VAT, not only broke an election pledge (she's a lawyer like Starmer to maybe 8 to 15 per cent is not quite double) but also caused a spike in inflation, the very thing she had sworn to combat and that had been coming down under Labour.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 120,995

    There’s also this poll that presents a somewhat different narrative…

    Labour lead at 12pts
    Westminster voting intention

    LAB: 33% (-1)
    CON: 21% (-3)
    REF: 18% (+3)
    LDEM: 13% (-)
    GRN: 7% (-)

    via @techneUK, 19 Sep

    https://x.com/britainelects/status/1838597568508383391

    Even that poll has a 2% swing from Labour to Reform since the general election
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,081
    edited September 25
    HYUFD said:

    The one thing you can say about Winter fuel allowance being restricted from a Labour perspective is it mainly hits pensioners who are mostly Tory voters. Even if voters as a whole still disapprove of the restrictions.

    Starmer's favourable rating now below that of the Labour party as a whole is also not good for him

    It isn't but the next general election is not for a while yet, so Starmer's rating is concerning but not fatal.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417
    FF43 said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
    Possibly the other side of the coin from another criticism of him, that he's changeable.
    I'd say that, like many politicians, he bent with the wind on the way up. Hence serving under Corbyn.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    HYUFD said:

    The one thing you can say about Winter fuel allowance being restricted from a Labour perspective is it mainly hits pensioners who are mostly Tory voters. Even if voters as a whole still disapprove of the restrictions.

    Starmer's favourable rating now below that of the Labour party as a whole is also not good for him

    Not "mostly", 46% of actual voters aged 70+

    https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49978-how-britain-voted-in-the-2024-general-election
  • eekeek Posts: 27,481
    Sandpit said:

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    Some of us have been saying for months that the economy is the most important issue of the election.

    The vast majority of Americans, with the exception of the upper class top 10%, are a long way from feeling better off than they were four years ago.
    If Haley was the Republican candidate - i think the result would be a foregone conclusion - she would win,

    The fact Trump (and his age / baggage) is their candidate is the only reason this election is close because based on the economy the Democrats should lose..
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,042

    kamski said:

    Hopefully you'll all spot the subtle Shakespeare reference.

    I don't think I get it.
    "Love Labour's lost" or "Labour's love lost" make more sense to me.

    Or is the first apostrophe of the grocer variety?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love's_Labour's_Lost#Title
    Right, yes but the first apostrophe-s implies the labour belongs to the love, which makes sense for Shakespeare but not the Labour party?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 120,995
    edited September 25

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Not entirely true, Farage doesn't want Jenrick as Tory leader he wants Tugendhat or
    Cleverly. In fact I think Farage fears Jenrick even more than
    Badenoch. Jenrick with white
    working class parents from
    the Midlands unlike him and
    taking a hard line on
    immigration designed to
    appeal to ex Tory Reform
    voters.

    It is Starmer and Davey who
    want Jenrick not Tugendhat or Cleverly. So you are right for them but not for Farage
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730

    Nigelb said:

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year.
    That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.

    So no big deal.

    You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
    It's no conspiracy that anything or anyone that looks vaguely pro Trump is bullied or trash-talked. Which means many stay silent.

    Fact.
    And of course you're a complete stranger to trash talk ?

    I like you, Casino, but you need to learn to take it, alongside dishing it out, as you do on a regular basis
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417

    Icarus said:

    If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.

    Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_longest_suicide_note_in_history

    Wikipedia is kind to them... The policies included, essentially, surrender in the Cold War.

    This was why the Labour Party split, fundamentally.

    It took them until 1997 - 17 years - to rebuild to electability.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,020

    Icarus said:

    If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.

    Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
    Yes - I remember my undergraduate British politics course (taught by David Marquand) demonstrating this point. Thr Falklands brought a temporary spike in Con VI, but it reverted to the trend line comfortably before the election.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730
    edited September 25
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    The fundamentals look good for the Republicans this year, according to Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/651092/2024-election-environment-favorable-gop.aspx

    I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.

    It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year.
    That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.

    So no big deal.

    You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
    The polls were clear in the primaries that Haley led Biden and Harris more than Trump did and Haley was significantly ahead with Independent swing voters of Trump in the GOP primaries especially.

    However polls also showed had she been nominee and Trump gone third party that handed the election back to the Democrats again
    Which just goes to underline that the Republicans' problem is Trump.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,291
    Latest Trump Tweet: “The Cost of Kamala”



    https://x.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1838730690344403449
  • Cookie said:

    Icarus said:

    If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.

    Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
    Yes - I remember my undergraduate British politics course (taught by David Marquand) demonstrating this point. Thr Falklands brought a temporary spike in Con VI, but it reverted to the trend line comfortably before the election.
    A Gallup poll two days before the invasion had the Tories leading the Alliance by 2% and Labour in third place.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730

    Icarus said:

    If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.

    Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
    They'd still possibly have lost, though.
    The war turned what was a flip of the coin into a certainty. And had Thatcher actually lost the Falklands, she'd have lost the election.
  • tlg86 said:

    Foxy said:

    Eabhal said:

    FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.

    Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.

    It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.

    I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.

    Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.

    Spending political capital like that, to no purpose, suggests the lack of an overall plan.

    Which is what New Labour definitely had.

    I can’t see why they didn’t tell the OBR to work double shifts and get the budget out earlier. If, indeed, that is the blocker.
    I don't know if Sunak meant for this to happen, but a July election really has buggered Labour.
    Blair and Brown had their plan ready far early than a few months before 1997
    But the government's finances were healthy then, thanks to the Tories' Fuel Price Escalator.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,957

    FF43 said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
    Possibly the other side of the coin from another criticism of him, that he's changeable.
    I'd say that, like many politicians, he bent with the wind on the way up. Hence serving under Corbyn.
    You could lay the same charge against the entire Conservative Party who served under Johnson. What sets Starmer apart is changeability combined with ambition, focus and ruthlessness.
  • mercatormercator Posts: 815
    Sandpit said:

    Latest Trump Tweet: “The Cost of Kamala”



    https://x.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1838730690344403449

    Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.

    It's the economy, stupid
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730
    Cookie said:

    Icarus said:

    If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.

    Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
    Yes - I remember my undergraduate British politics course (taught by David Marquand) demonstrating this point. Thr Falklands brought a temporary spike in Con VI, but it reverted to the trend line comfortably before the election.
    And I remember the election.
  • IcarusIcarus Posts: 983
    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Not entirely true, Farage doesn't want Jenrick as Tory leader he wants Tugendhat or
    Cleverly. In fact I think Farage fears Jenrick even more than
    Badenoch. Jenrick with white
    working class parents from
    the Midlands unlike him and
    taking a hard line on
    immigration designed to
    appeal to ex Tory Reform
    voters.

    It is Starmer and Davey who
    want Jenrick not Tugendhat or Cleverly. So you are right for them but not for Farage
    Given that Starmer will not introduce PR for 2029, the only way the Conservatives have any chance at the next election is to do a deal with Farage. Getting a local party to stand down as part of a national deal is very difficult to achieve.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,020
    HYUFD said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Not entirely true, Farage doesn't want Jenrick as Tory leader he wants Tugendhat or
    Cleverly. In fact I think Farage fears Jenrick even more than
    Badenoch. Jenrick with white
    working class parents from
    the Midlands unlike him and
    taking a hard line on
    immigration designed to
    appeal to ex Tory Reform
    voters.

    It is Starmer and Davey who
    want Jenrick not Tugendhat or Cleverly. So you are right for them but not for Farage
    If I have one criticism of the above post, it is that it appears to be laid out as - and therefore I am trying to read it as - a poem, and I can't make it scan. I'm sure its unintentional.
    But aside from that, I think you are right. There are no obviously good answers for any big party in multiparty politics.
  • A lot of what is said is true but it is scarcely true to say Starmer started with sixty months. Assuming he aspires to re-election then he has to be thinking of going to the country in May 2028, that is 46 months, not 60.

    Also it is hard to believe he will be as leaden in his approach to government from now on as he has been in the first three months.

    I always said that if Boris Johnson had to tell his appointees not to piss on the table then he was making the wrong appointments. It is just the same that if Keir Starmer's appointees have to be told not to lap up freebies like a cat drinking milk then he too is making the wrong appointments. If he thinks it is OK to accept free clothes, glasses, days out at ghastly events, then he needs to spend more time looking into a mirror.
  • FF43 said:

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.

    Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.

    As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.

    Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
    Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.

    There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.

    Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.

    The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.

    Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.

    Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
    "....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
    Possibly the other side of the coin from another criticism of him, that he's changeable.
    I'd say that, like many politicians, he bent with the wind on the way up. Hence serving under Corbyn.
    Like many politicians but sure like most leaders, from Liz Truss to Mrs Thatcher serving in Edward Heath's Cabinet.
  • I note that the Conservatives won both local byelections yesterday, one from Labour in Surrey (Nick Palmer's old ward) and the other from Green in Mid-Suffolk.

    Something to watch out for, as there are quite a few by-elections coming up.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,551

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.

    The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
  • mercator said:

    Sandpit said:

    Latest Trump Tweet: “The Cost of Kamala”



    https://x.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1838730690344403449

    Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.

    It's the economy, stupid
    And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,380
    Sandpit said:

    Latest Trump Tweet: “The Cost of Kamala”



    https://x.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1838730690344403449

    What are the those they've used for pictures under 'chicken', 'ham' and 'cheese'? :open_mouth:
  • A lot of what is said is true but it is scarcely true to say Starmer started with sixty months. Assuming he aspires to re-election then he has to be thinking of going to the country in May 2028, that is 46 months, not 60.

    Also it is hard to believe he will be as leaden in his approach to government from now on as he has been in the first three months.

    I always said that if Boris Johnson had to tell his appointees not to piss on the table then he was making the wrong appointments. It is just the same that if Keir Starmer's appointees have to be told not to lap up freebies like a cat drinking milk then he too is making the wrong appointments. If he thinks it is OK to accept free clothes, glasses, days out at ghastly events, then he needs to spend more time looking into a mirror.

    Keir Starmer is a lawyer and has retained a lawyer's instincts, not a politician's, so free clothes are fine because they are legal. How they will be seen by the public is never considered. Starmer's lack of political nous is aggravated by those who surround him. Reeves is a BofE technocrat who'd probably feel more at home running the OBR than as Chancellor waiting for it to pronounce, and Sue Gray a civil servant (and one who previously annoyed Whitehall over Partygate). There's no Alastair Campbell or Gordon Brown or Willie Whitelaw.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,730

    mercator said:

    Sandpit said:

    Latest Trump Tweet: “The Cost of Kamala”



    https://x.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1838730690344403449

    Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.

    It's the economy, stupid
    And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
    And "halving" the cost of energy.

    Just fantasy economics.
  • Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.

    The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
    The discourse is wonderfully enriched by TRUSS a thousand times
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,291

    A lot of what is said is true but it is scarcely true to say Starmer started with sixty months. Assuming he aspires to re-election then he has to be thinking of going to the country in May 2028, that is 46 months, not 60.

    Also it is hard to believe he will be as leaden in his approach to government from now on as he has been in the first three months.

    I always said that if Boris Johnson had to tell his appointees not to piss on the table then he was making the wrong appointments. It is just the same that if Keir Starmer's appointees have to be told not to lap up freebies like a cat drinking milk then he too is making the wrong appointments. If he thinks it is OK to accept free clothes, glasses, days out at ghastly events, then he needs to spend more time looking into a mirror.

    Keir Starmer is a lawyer and has retained a lawyer's instincts, not a politician's, so free clothes are fine because they are legal. How they will be seen by the public is never considered. Starmer's lack of political nous is aggravated by those who surround him. Reeves is a BofE technocrat who'd probably feel more at home running the OBR than as Chancellor waiting for it to pronounce, and Sue Gray a civil servant (and one who previously annoyed Whitehall over Partygate). There's no Alastair Campbell or Gordon Brown or Willie Whitelaw.
    Every Prime Minister needs a Willie.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,417

    Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.

    The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
    Except that that is a single thread within a wider discourse. We've seen similar analyses before - that topics that upset a poster are magnified in their mind to being the whole conversation.

    Governments get opposed. I get that it is harder for Labour supporters - they spend more time as the "moral opposition" - but it is how it rolls.
  • Good morning

    I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour

    The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies

    You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team

    I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then

    I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help

    No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.

    The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
    Except that that is a single thread within a wider discourse. We've seen similar analyses before - that topics that upset a poster are magnified in their mind to being the whole conversation.

    Governments get opposed. I get that it is harder for Labour supporters - they spend more time as the "moral opposition" - but it is how it rolls.
    Yeah. WillGlen is the new Scott for the next few years. Life goes on.
Sign In or Register to comment.