Howdy, Stranger!

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

More momentum for Cleverly – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,212
edited November 7 in General
imageMore momentum for Cleverly – politicalbetting.com

The Conservative Party needs to rebuild trust on economic competence, cutting migration and reforming public services. Strong, clear and measured. James has what it takes.Read why I’m backing @JamesCleverly? https://t.co/Ko6ENSZ6le

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,972
    First first in ages?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012
    Chagos clearly doing untold damage to Cleverly.

    I suspect that he will pick up the TT group, FWTIW, as well.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,920
    edited October 8
    Of the four survivors, which is the one who believes in honstry and decency and actually demonstrates these qualities in practice?

    Would that be a First?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    ClippP said:

    Of the four survivors, which is the one who believes in honstry and decency and actually demonstrates these qualities in practice?

    JENRICK
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,394
    For a minute I caught myself wondering if Rishi would still be in place to light Diwali candles in Downing Street for another year, but then I remembered he's LotO now.

    In theory, the new leader will be announced just after the start of Diwali but I expect one of the final two to withdraw like Andrea Leadsom so there will be no members' vote. It is said that David Cameron was unhappy to be replaced before summer.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    ClippP said:

    Of the four survivors, which is the one who believes in honstry and decency and actually demonstrates these qualities in practice?

    Would that be a First?

    Robert Jenrick, not only is he a lawyer, he is a Cambridge educated lawyer.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,394
    ClippP said:

    Of the four survivors, which is the one who believes in honstry and decency and actually demonstrates these qualities in practice?

    Would that be a First?

    Honesty AND decency? You set the bar high. And no to your second question.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,972
    edited October 8
    So the night watchman gets 33 and nearly makes it to lunch, then Rizwan the batsman he was protecting goes for a duck! The first tiny bit of hope for England since early yesterday morning.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited October 8
    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    ClippP said:

    Of the four survivors, which is the one who believes in honstry and decency and actually demonstrates these qualities in practice?

    Would that be a First?

    Robert Jenrick, not only is he a lawyer, he is a Cambridge educated lawyer.
    You can look at his deal with Desmond and still claim he's honest and decent?

    I know a lawyer has to represent their client as best as they can but can you at least be vaguely plausible...
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,141
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    Following an actual poll with an hypothetical one in the same format? The act of a bounder, sir.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    TOPPING said:

    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.

    The Conservatives need to be able to deliver on migration. Then, they can pull back some (not all) of those Reform votes.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    It is said that David Cameron was unhappy to be replaced before summer.

    In which case he shouldn't have resigned in the first place.

    And in reality he shouldn't have let Osbourne put in a referendum given the plan to destroy the lib dem vote..
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,895
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    Labour are ten points ahead of Reform, and Reform were also overstated in the opinion polls before the last GE.

    If you're going to just make the numbers up why not put Labour in fifth?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    Following an actual poll with an hypothetical one in the same format? The act of a bounder, sir.
    I am using the accepted process of voter intent REALLOCATION™️, as pioneered by famed PB psephologist @BartholomewRoberts
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.

    The Conservatives need to be able to deliver on migration. Then, they can pull back some (not all) of those Reform votes.
    No one wants to "deliver on migration". They want, performatively, to "deliver on highly visible boat crossings bringing a few thousand people to the UK via France" but that's about it.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,420

    TOPPING said:

    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.

    The Conservatives need to be able to deliver on migration. Then, they can pull back some (not all) of those Reform votes.
    The Conservatives are out of power. How can they deliver on migration?

    They can talk about migration, but they have to wait until people have forgotten their recent record.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    TOPPING said:

    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.

    The Conservatives need to be able to deliver on migration. Then, they can pull back some (not all) of those Reform votes.
    The Conservatives are out of power. How can they deliver on migration?

    They can talk about migration, but they have to wait until people have forgotten their recent record.
    The polls tell us people are forgetting very quickly, as they gaze in horror at the Labour train wreck (ongoing)
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,114
    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    eek said:

    ClippP said:

    Of the four survivors, which is the one who believes in honstry and decency and actually demonstrates these qualities in practice?

    Would that be a First?

    Robert Jenrick, not only is he a lawyer, he is a Cambridge educated lawyer.
    You can look at his deal with Desmond and still claim he's honest and decent?

    I know a lawyer has to represent their client as best as they can but can you at least be vaguely plausible...
    I've said if the final two are Jenrick and Badenoch then I will be voting for Badenoch which tells you what I think about Jenrick.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,609
    edited October 8
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    Not sure about your speculation but that poll has labour lead of just 1%

    Also yougov now have Labour at 59% sleazy compared to lhe last government of 77%

    Labour are not having a good first 100 days

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1843188778489565437?t=L8JUoZbHU_VSwmqAtwFOWA&s=19
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Everyone knew that it would be a shitshow for whoever was in power after the election. Rishi called it early because he saw a couple of economic aggregates ticking up and hoped it presaged a broader recovery. It might still do but there is a hell of a lot of pain in the meantime. It is no surprise that "the government" is unpopular because the huge spending over the past five years now has to be reversed and addressed.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I posted this story myself in the last thread

    I think it’s bollocks, or at least only half of a deeper story. Its spin put out by Labour (and maybe even Tories) as they see how badly this is playing

    However if it IS true, fuck Joe Biden

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668

    TOPPING said:

    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.

    The Conservatives need to be able to deliver on migration. Then, they can pull back some (not all) of those Reform votes.
    The Conservatives are out of power. How can they deliver on migration?

    They can talk about migration, but they have to wait until people have forgotten their recent record.
    They need to convince people they're in earnest with a clear, well-thought through and credible plan and then follow through with delivery in office.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I see we can add Theory of Mind to the many subjects you know nothing about

    I am clearly in a playful mood. Hence my use of REALLOCATION™️
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    Thinking about it, this is a fantastic post. Takes a fact (ok an opinion poll) and then picks random alternative outcomes out of thin air, and then represents those random alternatives as "facts" (under that random alternative scenario).

    I know it is only Leon and it is PB and polling all that but this is how a lot of the internet works right now.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    edited October 8
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I see we can add Theory of Mind to the many subjects you know nothing about

    I am clearly in a playful mood. Hence my use of REALLOCATION™️
    Were you in a playful mood when you went full Stuart Dickson and posted a Welsh subsample as a proper poll?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    There is no such thing as society international law.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Leon said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I posted this story myself in the last thread

    I think it’s bollocks, or at least only half of a deeper story. Its spin put out by Labour (and maybe even Tories) as they see how badly this is playing

    However if it IS true, fuck Joe Biden

    US acts in its own interests; Leon outraged.

    The poor innocent.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.

    The Conservatives need to be able to deliver on migration. Then, they can pull back some (not all) of those Reform votes.
    No one wants to "deliver on migration". They want, performatively, to "deliver on highly visible boat crossings bringing a few thousand people to the UK via France" but that's about it.
    Then Reform will continue to poll well.

    The boats either need to all be returned to France (the French will want us to take a quota of theirs for this) or the HRA/ECHR is disapplied so those intercepted in the Channel can be immediately offshored or deported at will with no recourse to appeal.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,942
    edited October 8
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    What the polls showed in the run up to the election was a crash in Labour support , which I assume was the beginning of the widespread tactical voting that we saw at the GE.

    The Tory vote share did not change much in the polls, but Reform, LD and Green starting to move significantly. If polls are useful for one thing, it's catching such movements - they just failed to pick up the massive scale of it.

    Using that logic, and assuming that polls are understating the change since the election by 2x, I get:

    🌹Lab 27
    🌳Con 24
    ➡️ Ref 25
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 9%

    But I doubt it. I think things are probably quite stable, with the exception perhaps of a new movement to Reform.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,932
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    What if ... and what if ... and if .... and if ...

    And we have a LD government with a 200 majority with the Monster Raving Lonnie's in opposition.

    Pointless stuff.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    This story is obvious shite if you give it ten seconds thought. Since when has the USA been so terrified of << checks notes >> an “ICJ ruling”? How exactly is the ICJ gonna force the US to give up a military base? Send in its hit squad of Philippe Sands KC, armed with space lasers?

    More likely the USA was alarmed by the UK’s spineless cowardice, in even considering this nonsense, and THEN told us to sort it out if we were determined to “cede territory”
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.

    The Conservatives need to be able to deliver on migration. Then, they can pull back some (not all) of those Reform votes.
    The Conservatives are out of power. How can they deliver on migration?

    They can talk about migration, but they have to wait until people have forgotten their recent record.
    They need to convince people they're in earnest with a clear, well-thought through and credible plan and then follow through with delivery in office.
    no ifs and buts, you mean.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    Some appalling comments by Musk last night . Despicable . Joking about why it’s pointless killing Harris or Biden.

    The USA is in a very bad place.

  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,465
    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    What the polls showed in the run up to the election was a crash in Labour support , which I assume was the beginning of the widespread tactical voting that we saw at the GE.

    The Tory vote share did not change much in the polls, but Reform, LD and Green starting to move significantly. If polls are useful for one thing, it's catching such movements - they just failed to pick up the massive scale of it.

    Using that logic, and assuming that polls are understating the change since the election by 2x, I get:

    🌹Lab 27
    🌳Con 24
    ➡️ Ref 25
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 9%

    But I doubt it. I think things are probably quite stable, with the exception perhaps of a new movement to Reform.
    They are also fairly meaningless four years out from the next election.

    Still, if they keep the mind off the thought that an 80 seat majority was thrown away and there are now just 121 Conservative MPs in the House, they may be said to serve some purpose.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Leon said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    This story is obvious shite if you give it ten seconds thought. Since when has the USA been so terrified of << checks notes >> an “ICJ ruling”? How exactly is the ICJ gonna force the US to give up a military base? Send in its hit squad of Philippe Sands KC, armed with space lasers?

    More likely the USA was alarmed by the UK’s spineless cowardice, in even considering this nonsense, and THEN told us to sort it out if we were determined to “cede territory”
    Jason Beer would have had them off the island in 10mins flat.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,609
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    What if ... and what if ... and if .... and if ...

    And we have a LD government with a 200 majority with the Monster Raving Lonnie's in opposition.

    Pointless stuff.
    I would suggest that the more in common poll is a bona fide poll and does show Labour sub 30%

    The rest frankly is just irrelevant
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I see we can add Theory of Mind to the many subjects you know nothing about

    I am clearly in a playful mood. Hence my use of REALLOCATION™️
    Were you in a playful mood when you went full Stuart Dickson and posted a Welsh subsample as a proper poll?
    No, I was simultaneously drinking coffee, buying airplane tickets, driving around a sacred Serbo-Judaic tomb on the Albanian border, and laughing at yet another brilliant article in the Spectator, and I unsuccessfully multitasked
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    If international law meant the Diego Garcia base had to go, I am somewhat confident the law would be ignored. This deal means the future of the base is put onto a firmer legal base - international law is such a great thing!

    Being somewhat cynical.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,394
    eek said:

    It is said that David Cameron was unhappy to be replaced before summer.

    In which case he shouldn't have resigned in the first place.

    And in reality he shouldn't have let Osbourne put in a referendum given the plan to destroy the lib dem vote..
    Osborne was against the referendum. That was Cameron's idea. Remember that by this time, Cameron had already won two referendums, on AV and Sindy.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,112

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I haven't seen the tables for this one, but the change in the recent Techne was mostly a higher rate of "will not vote", "unknown" and a lower certainty to vote rather than much in the way of shift between the parties.

    Clearly Labour need to get a grip. Gray obviously failed in her job of preparing Labour to hit the ground running. They have 4 years of safe majority in which to recover from the poor start.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,932
    edited October 8

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    What if ... and what if ... and if .... and if ...

    And we have a LD government with a 200 majority with the Monster Raving Lonnie's in opposition.

    Pointless stuff.
    I would suggest that the more in common poll is a bona fide poll and does show Labour sub 30%

    The rest frankly is just irrelevant
    Oh I have no issues with the poll. It is the extrapolation (and to be frank that is an inaccurate use of the word as extrapolation implies it is based upon something tangible) by Leon.

    What is the point of taking a poll and then just randomly change the numbers.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,125
    Leon said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    This story is obvious shite if you give it ten seconds thought. Since when has the USA been so terrified of << checks notes >> an “ICJ ruling”? How exactly is the ICJ gonna force the US to give up a military base? Send in its hit squad of Philippe Sands KC, armed with space lasers?

    More likely the USA was alarmed by the UK’s spineless cowardice, in even considering this nonsense, and THEN told us to sort it out if we were determined to “cede territory”
    The Reagan Republicans probably were, but the Democrats are the party of spineless cowardice in foreign affairs (see, e.g. their position on allowing Ukraine to strike inside Russia) and the Trumpists won't even know where or care the Indian Ocean is.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    FF43 said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    If international law meant the Diego Garcia base had to go, I am somewhat confident the law would be ignored. This deal means the future of the base is put onto a firmer legal base - international law is such a great thing!

    Being somewhat cynical.
    The base is very important to the US, so even a slight doubt over its status is something that they'll want to sort.
    Leon's hurt feeelings, not so much.

    But it's not unreasonable to criticise our government for being a bit spineless over the affair.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    kjh said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    What if ... and what if ... and if .... and if ...

    And we have a LD government with a 200 majority with the Monster Raving Lonnie's in opposition.

    Pointless stuff.
    I would suggest that the more in common poll is a bona fide poll and does show Labour sub 30%

    The rest frankly is just irrelevant
    Oh I have no issues with the poll. It is the extrapolation (and to be frank that is an inaccurate use of the word as extrapolation implies it is based upon something tangible) by Leon.

    What is the point of taking a poll and then just randomly change the numbers.
    To wind you up? Just a guess, mind
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,932
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I see we can add Theory of Mind to the many subjects you know nothing about

    I am clearly in a playful mood. Hence my use of REALLOCATION™️
    Were you in a playful mood when you went full Stuart Dickson and posted a Welsh subsample as a proper poll?
    No, I was simultaneously drinking coffee, buying airplane tickets, driving around a sacred Serbo-Judaic tomb on the Albanian border, and laughing at yet another brilliant article in the Spectator, and I unsuccessfully multitasked
    But it's not as if you don't have a reputation for doing such stuff.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,934

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    What the polls showed in the run up to the election was a crash in Labour support , which I assume was the beginning of the widespread tactical voting that we saw at the GE.

    The Tory vote share did not change much in the polls, but Reform, LD and Green starting to move significantly. If polls are useful for one thing, it's catching such movements - they just failed to pick up the massive scale of it.

    Using that logic, and assuming that polls are understating the change since the election by 2x, I get:

    🌹Lab 27
    🌳Con 24
    ➡️ Ref 25
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 9%

    But I doubt it. I think things are probably quite stable, with the exception perhaps of a new movement to Reform.
    They are also fairly meaningless four years out from the next election.

    Still, if they keep the mind off the thought that an 80 seat majority was thrown away and there are now just 121 Conservative MPs in the House, they may be said to serve some purpose.
    They keep the mind focussed on how wide and shallow Labour's support was last time - and how that might well bite them on the arse next time out.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,442
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I haven't seen the tables for this one, but the change in the recent Techne was mostly a higher rate of "will not vote", "unknown" and a lower certainty to vote rather than much in the way of shift between the parties.

    Clearly Labour need to get a grip. Gray obviously failed in her job of preparing Labour to hit the ground running. They have 4 years of safe majority in which to recover from the poor start.
    And, to put a bit of perspective on this, Labour were ahead by this stage after 1979 and drawing level at this stage after 2010.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    FF43 said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    If international law meant the Diego Garcia base had to go, I am somewhat confident the law would be ignored. This deal means the future of the base is put onto a firmer legal base - international law is such a great thing!

    Being somewhat cynical.
    The idea that under "international law" the islands viking to Mauritius is laughable though.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    Following an actual poll with an hypothetical one in the same format? The act of a bounder, sir.
    Cad, Shirley?

    So fiddling the results without any knowledge of the adjustments or the raw data?

    Mights as well use Scottish sub-samples of 1.65 people and a cat (subsequently eaten by @Leon)

  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,213

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I haven't seen the tables for this one, but the change in the recent Techne was mostly a higher rate of "will not vote", "unknown" and a lower certainty to vote rather than much in the way of shift between the parties.

    Clearly Labour need to get a grip. Gray obviously failed in her job of preparing Labour to hit the ground running. They have 4 years of safe majority in which to recover from the poor start.
    And, to put a bit of perspective on this, Labour were ahead by this stage after 1979 and drawing level at this stage after 2010.
    They started much closer in 2010 though
  • kenObikenObi Posts: 211
    Leon said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I posted this story myself in the last thread

    I think it’s bollocks, or at least only half of a deeper story. Its spin put out by Labour (and maybe even Tories) as they see how badly this is playing

    However if it IS true, fuck Joe Biden

    The Telegraph and GB News being played by Labour spin.

    Sure you haven't got a couple of pencils stuck up your nose ?

    Its playing badly with GB news viewers.

  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,877
    Leon said:

    ClippP said:

    Of the four survivors, which is the one who believes in honstry and decency and actually demonstrates these qualities in practice?

    JENRICK
    Good morning everyone.

    We have two fiction writers in our midst :smile:

    I can't comment on Mr Clipp, who could be a bus conductor, an old fashioned police officer, or a man with a board and a pencil.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,585
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    Labour are disappointing from the left (2-child benefit, WFA), that 6-7% would go Green or Lib Dem.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,811

    eek said:

    It is said that David Cameron was unhappy to be replaced before summer.

    In which case he shouldn't have resigned in the first place.

    And in reality he shouldn't have let Osbourne put in a referendum given the plan to destroy the lib dem vote..
    Osborne was against the referendum. That was Cameron's idea. Remember that by this time, Cameron had already won two referendums, on AV and Sindy.
    Yeah, but they had a fright over Sindy. Should have learnt from that - promise of "change" with a flag is dangerously seductive to low-info voters.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,932
    Leon said:

    kjh said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    What if ... and what if ... and if .... and if ...

    And we have a LD government with a 200 majority with the Monster Raving Lonnie's in opposition.

    Pointless stuff.
    I would suggest that the more in common poll is a bona fide poll and does show Labour sub 30%

    The rest frankly is just irrelevant
    Oh I have no issues with the poll. It is the extrapolation (and to be frank that is an inaccurate use of the word as extrapolation implies it is based upon something tangible) by Leon.

    What is the point of taking a poll and then just randomly change the numbers.
    To wind you up? Just a guess, mind
    No you weren't.

    Oh and that multi tasking. Just wondering how you managed to 'simultaneously' drive while drinking coffee and ordering airline tickets plus posting here and reading a Spectator article. How many eyes and arms do you have or is that another ludicrous extrapolation?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I see we can add Theory of Mind to the many subjects you know nothing about

    I am clearly in a playful mood. Hence my use of REALLOCATION™️
    Were you in a playful mood when you went full Stuart Dickson and posted a Welsh subsample as a proper poll?
    Oh yeah

    image
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668

    FF43 said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    If international law meant the Diego Garcia base had to go, I am somewhat confident the law would be ignored. This deal means the future of the base is put onto a firmer legal base - international law is such a great thing!

    Being somewhat cynical.
    The idea that under "international law" the islands viking to Mauritius is laughable though.
    No idea where viking came from there.

    But the ICJ would probably give them to them too if it's members wanted it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,668
    If I was good at photoshop I'd change John Candy's face to David Lammy and the Casio he's proffering to a map of Diego Garcia.

    Memes.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,141
    Largely ’I’m a tough statesman’ tiny willie waving, but since there’s nothing Bibi would like more than a coalition of western civilisation against the mullahs unlikely to give him pause.


  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,945
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Royale, yesterday I had a typo (thankfully caught) of 'tyre' instead of 'tower'. Was yours a weird auto-correct?

    I'm mildly amused by the American 'defence'.

    Yes, this deal's absolute shit for us, losing us sovereign territory, reigniting the Argentine desire for the Falklands, costing us money for the privilege of leaving, but the Americans like it so it must be good. Right?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I haven't seen the tables for this one, but the change in the recent Techne was mostly a higher rate of "will not vote", "unknown" and a lower certainty to vote rather than much in the way of shift between the parties.

    Clearly Labour need to get a grip. Gray obviously failed in her job of preparing Labour to hit the ground running. They have 4 years of safe majority in which to recover from the poor start.
    And, to put a bit of perspective on this, Labour were ahead by this stage after 1979 and drawing level at this stage after 2010.
    I don't believe Leon does "perspective".
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,920
    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    ClippP said:

    Of the four survivors, which is the one who believes in honstry and decency and actually demonstrates these qualities in practice?

    JENRICK
    Good morning everyone.

    We have two fiction writers in our midst :smile:

    I can't comment on Mr Clipp, who could be a bus conductor, an old fashioned police officer, or a man with a board and a pencil.
    Not at all, Mr W. No fiction from me. I really do believe that Mr Stride would have made a better leader than any of the four who outlived him.

    I think that counts as a opinion rather than as fiction.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857
    TOPPING said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    There is no such thing as society international law.
    This, the suggestion there is no international law, would come as rather bad news to various rather boring and ignored elements of global life - which actually work more or less most of the time - like shipping, air travel and the postal service.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    FF43 said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    If international law meant the Diego Garcia base had to go, I am somewhat confident the law would be ignored. This deal means the future of the base is put onto a firmer legal base - international law is such a great thing!

    Being somewhat cynical.
    The idea that under "international law" the islands viking to Mauritius is laughable though.
    No idea where viking came from there.

    But the ICJ would probably give them to them too if it's members wanted it.
    Somewhere between sad and funny is that the actual islanders will get screwed again.

    Mauritius will flog the fishing rights to all comers. A token amount of money will find its way to the islanders. Who will probably not get to return to the islands, because of… reasons.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    "Progress" is I think the word you are looking for.

    Think of it as the peasants overthrowing the evil baron and allocating to themselves three fiefs of land from his estate.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    29% for a government in power for 95 days is pretty awful.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,394

    eek said:

    It is said that David Cameron was unhappy to be replaced before summer.

    In which case he shouldn't have resigned in the first place.

    And in reality he shouldn't have let Osbourne put in a referendum given the plan to destroy the lib dem vote..
    Osborne was against the referendum. That was Cameron's idea. Remember that by this time, Cameron had already won two referendums, on AV and Sindy.
    Yeah, but they had a fright over Sindy. Should have learnt from that - promise of "change" with a flag is dangerously seductive to low-info voters.
    Yes, Cameron learned precisely the wrong message from Sindy, and also from the 2010 general election when he just scraped home. He saw himself as undefeated champion of campaign and debate. What Cameron should have learned from two such close-run things, far tighter than polls forecast, is that his negative campaigning style actively harmed his causes.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,141
    edited October 8

    eek said:

    It is said that David Cameron was unhappy to be replaced before summer.

    In which case he shouldn't have resigned in the first place.

    And in reality he shouldn't have let Osbourne put in a referendum given the plan to destroy the lib dem vote..
    Osborne was against the referendum. That was Cameron's idea. Remember that by this time, Cameron had already won two referendums, on AV and Sindy.
    Yeah, but they had a fright over Sindy. Should have learnt from that - promise of "change" with a flag is dangerously seductive to low-info voters.
    Probly thought empty promises of ‘stability’ would again be more seductive to even lower information ones.

    https://x.com/uk_together/status/506899714923843584?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q

  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    Labour are disappointing from the left (2-child benefit, WFA), that 6-7% would go Green or Lib Dem.
    But the Greens, Nats and LDs are all down. The trend is rightwards
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,934
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    "Progress" is I think the word you are looking for.

    Think of it as the peasants overthrowing the evil baron and allocating to themselves three fiefs of land from his estate.
    Then all dying of hunger because....
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    "Progress" is I think the word you are looking for.

    Think of it as the peasants overthrowing the evil baron and allocating to themselves three fiefs of land from his estate.
    Another word is “Zimbabwe”
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    edited October 8
    Despite all the so-called momentum for Cleverly he still has only 13 declared backers compared to 21 for Badenoch and 22 for Jenrick. Tugendhat also has 13, although 2 of those are anonymous. (Guido's figures don't include the candidate themselves).

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1z66vstPc0ZRXDAVxUBwoi6sAia4DnXKRESta32k85dM/edit?gid=1325150590#gid=1325150590
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,934
    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    Inevitable. Labour hates wealth.

    Until it starts closing hospitals.

    MEMO TO LABOUR: those rich fuckers you hate? They pay for the NHS.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    TOPPING said:

    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    "Progress" is I think the word you are looking for.

    Think of it as the peasants overthrowing the evil baron and allocating to themselves three fiefs of land from his estate.
    Then all dying of hunger because....
    … in an unusual plot twist the Evil Baron took the land with him when he fled….
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,125

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    Is there any evidence for that, or is it just an assertion? Are polls more accurate if the next election is a year or two after the last one rather than four or five years?

    And if false recall is the issue, why do polls overstate Labour far more often than the Conservatives, as opposed to getting things wrong randomly? Do one party's supporters have much worse memories than those of the other? As the Conservatives are older, maybe you'd think their supporters are more likely to forget how they voted, but then why was the general anti-Tory bias also prevalent when the age differential in voting was not so pronounced? And why is anti-Right wing bias also observable in other, though not all, democracies, where the age gap is also less pronounced if it exists?

    False recall could be caused by people not wanting to admit to themselves or the pollster how they voted last time, rather than genuinely forgetting, just as the membership of the French Resistance grew exponentially after Liberation. In which case it is likely to be a function of current party popularity, rather than the time since the last election.

    No answers here, only questions.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    Inevitable. Labour hates wealth.

    Until it starts closing hospitals.

    MEMO TO LABOUR: those rich fuckers you hate? They pay for the NHS.
    “Fuck off to Dubai. See if we care”

    There was a report in the Guardian yesterday about the dire state of the UK and London art market. They tried to blame it on Brexit, or the Tory-something-something, but they studiously ignored the obvious reason

    Rich people are fleeing Labour Britain. Rich people buy art
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,877

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    Here's the full piece.
    https://archive.ph/PmDx8

    I'm not sure how much of this is credible, given the Telegraph - although it's perhaps not what you would expect them to say entirely. Are they Biden-bashing? The USA certainly has quite the record of making others make big long term sacrifices in order to get the USA smaller short-term benefits.

    In my book the ICJ ruling does not have much to back it up.

    The Marine Protected Area is toast, but that MPA feels like the "quick, create a body that looks like a Parliament" done just before Hong-Kong was returned.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,442

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I haven't seen the tables for this one, but the change in the recent Techne was mostly a higher rate of "will not vote", "unknown" and a lower certainty to vote rather than much in the way of shift between the parties.

    Clearly Labour need to get a grip. Gray obviously failed in her job of preparing Labour to hit the ground running. They have 4 years of safe majority in which to recover from the poor start.
    And, to put a bit of perspective on this, Labour were ahead by this stage after 1979 and drawing level at this stage after 2010.
    I don't believe Leon does "perspective".
    I think he does, in much the same way that MC Escher did.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972

    Largely ’I’m a tough statesman’ tiny willie waving, but since there’s nothing Bibi would like more than a coalition of western civilisation against the mullahs unlikely to give him pause.


    We're in danger of a wider regional war he cautions, so he's going to help fuel the flames.

    Israel alone cannot defeat Iran. They would love nothing more than the get the USA and useful idiots like the USA to do their bidding.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,236
    Nigelb said:

    FF43 said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    If international law meant the Diego Garcia base had to go, I am somewhat confident the law would be ignored. This deal means the future of the base is put onto a firmer legal base - international law is such a great thing!

    Being somewhat cynical.
    The base is very important to the US, so even a slight doubt over its status is something that they'll want to sort.
    Leon's hurt feeelings, not so much.

    But it's not unreasonable to criticise our government for being a bit spineless over the affair.
    The best that can be said on that is the new deal makes no practical difference for the Chagossians and they are no worse off. They weren't going back before and they won't now. As far as I know the rest of Chagos is uninhabitable as a massive military base occupies Diego Garcia.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,226
    edited October 8

    TOPPING said:

    As for the Cons it is tempting to say it doesn't matter who wins because they have an impossible task of appealing both to the Reformites and the disaffected Cameroon remainers. I don't think there's a party that can appeal to both groups and that's what is needed to overturn Lab.

    That said, if someone sufficiently of the right can convince, ok fool the Reformers that they have their back while in fact signalling to the Cameroons that the Cons is going to become less ghastly then that would be job done.

    Only Cleverly and TT I think would be able to do that. It's quite a complicated political strategy, that said, because you wouldn't be able to be explicit with either side about what they were really up to.

    I, as an ex-Cons Cameroonian Remainer, would be happy with either of those because I would (want, or convince myself) to believe that that was the strategy they were employing.

    Then again, I admire Badenoch because she is out there as who she is and has a raw honesty and talent.

    Jenrick is a "safe" pair of hands and superficially attractive (looks the part as cross between Clark Kent and James Corden) who is unlikely to form and hold together an election-winning coalition of current and former ex-Cons.

    The Conservatives need to be able to deliver on migration. Then, they can pull back some (not all) of those Reform votes.
    I don't disagree, but how? They were the government, they talked about reducing immigration to the tens of thousands, then decided to go for unprecedentedly high levels. They now aren't the government any more, in no small part because of this, which means they don't have the power to deliver.

    Personally, I'm wary of unspotted leopards smelling strongly of paint. And that's basically what they are.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,521
    Leon said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    This story is obvious shite if you give it ten seconds thought. Since when has the USA been so terrified of << checks notes >> an “ICJ ruling”? How exactly is the ICJ gonna force the US to give up a military base? Send in its hit squad of Philippe Sands KC, armed with space lasers?

    More likely the USA was alarmed by the UK’s spineless cowardice, in even considering this nonsense, and THEN told us to sort it out if we were determined to “cede territory”
    States follow international law when it suits them, and ignore it when it suits them. If the ICJ ruled that the US should give Guantanamo to Cuba, you can US response would be.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    I see we can add Theory of Mind to the many subjects you know nothing about

    I am clearly in a playful mood. Hence my use of REALLOCATION™️
    Were you in a playful mood when you went full Stuart Dickson and posted a Welsh subsample as a proper poll?
    Is "playful mood" analogous of trolling.

    If it's not fictional polls it's holiday snaps, if it's not holiday snaps it's that dreary, but detailed story about a forty year old fling with a minor celebrity in a French churchyard. Surely we've all at some stage in our lives been intimate with minor celebrities. Mine was a one night stand with a Welsh TV newsreader in the mid 1980s, but you are already bored so I'll stop ...
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,951
    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    While there is definitely an exodus of millionaires - I know one or two who have already gone - the big risk is the brain drain of the young and ambitious.

    What's left in broken britain for people other than to be pay pigs for unproductive spongers and boat people? If you're in your 20s, bright, ambitious, you can stay in broken britain and be taxed to the eyeballs while being unable to ever save money to get on the property ladder (and be cheated at every turn if you finally do), or you can bugger off to Dubai, pay 0% tax and like as not avoid the graduate tax aka student loan while you're at it.

    It's not just the millionaires we'll lose over the next five years. It's the young and ambitious who can make more and pay less tax elsewhere.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172

    FF43 said:

    So @Leon and all the other PBers raging at Lammy and Starmer for giving away BIOT and shouting that the Americans are very pissed off.

    Here are the latest facts:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/10/07/joe-biden-pushed-uk-to-surrender-chagos-islands/

    Biden pushed for the deal very hard knowing a court case was coming that would binding and see them lose access to airbase.

    I'm not sure an ICJ (which is just a body of the UN) ruling can force a State to cede territory, but it would mean the UK would have had to ignore the ruling. Just as we've ignored the UN's list of non self governing territories for decades.

    I'd have ignored the ruling.
    If international law meant the Diego Garcia base had to go, I am somewhat confident the law would be ignored. This deal means the future of the base is put onto a firmer legal base - international law is such a great thing!

    Being somewhat cynical.
    The idea that under "international law" the islands viking to Mauritius is laughable though.
    No idea where viking came from there.

    But the ICJ would probably give them to them too if it's members wanted it.
    Somewhere between Fair Isle and North Utsire ?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,932
    edited October 8
    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    Telegraph writing scare article that has been written so many times before. Bearing in mind being a millionaire isn't what it was and it isn't that uncommon particularly in the SE and London. I know many people in the £3 - £10 million range and not one of us is discussing moving abroad. Buying a holiday home maybe, but that has always been so.

    It is a repeating scare story. People have homes, communities, children to think of. Only once you get into huge amounts of money, probably without children do you float your residence.

    People emigrate and often driven by a better job, but if you have already made it you don't move because of tax, you move for a new adventure, sun, retire, new job, etc.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited October 8
    Book recommendation:


    "Travellers in the Third Reich: The Rise of Fascism Through the Eyes of Everyday People" by Julia Boyd

    It’s a brilliant piece of history. As the famous, semi famous and entirely ordinary look at Germany from 1922-1940. You get a much better idea of what it was like to be in Germany in those years, and how and why Hitler succeeded. And how it could easily happen again, here and now


    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Travellers-Third-Reich-Fascism-Everyday/dp/1783963816?dplnkId=30f9fe5b-dc95-40a1-8f3c-12cce61cb50c&nodl=1
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,352
    September local by-election summary klaxon:

    Implied National Vote Shares based on Average PNV defended - average vote share change.

    Data points where the party was involved in both the prior election and the by-election:

    Con 29.7 (+1.9 on prior average PNV)
    Labour 26.0 (-8.8)
    LD 21.1 (+1.8)

    In Scotland
    SNP 22.0 (-12.1)

    Parties with no PNV score:
    Green, average +3.3 (16 BEs)
    Reform, +7.8 on a single data point in Stockton (they stood in more, but had not stood in the previous elections anywhere else
    )

    Discussion:
    - Clearly not a GE VI and more relevant to next May

    - Vast majority of BE are baselined to 2022, 2023 when Labour had an average 7 point lead.

    - May 25 round will be against 2021 priors, with a 7 point Con lead, and above numbers would indicate Con losses to LD and Labour steady and perhaps advancing slightly.

    - Labour are also defending a lot of seats vacated by their new MPs, so may be suffering a touch of proportional swing defending a high prior vote share.

    - Reform standing in more seats and continued Ind involvement give some idea of
    how Reform might hit others, even if we can't directly measure how much Reform are advancing because of no priors.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172

    If I was good at photoshop I'd change John Candy's face to David Lammy and the Casio he's proffering to a map of Diego Garcia.

    Memes.

    Don't tell me you were doing the Tory social media stuff during the last election ?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,350
    kyf_100 said:

    Leon said:

    This is the catastrophe looming for the UK under Labour

    “One Fifth of All Millionaires To Leave Britain by 2028”

    https://x.com/guidofawkes/status/1843554081672954112?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/10/07/britain-suffer-biggest-millionaires-exodus-globally-non-dom/

    Labour are chasing away the rich 1%, who pay 30% of our entire tax take. The world has changed and people can work remotely

    Labour are going to run out of money, they will have to tax more and more, driving away MORE rich people - meanwhile poor people keep arriving. We’re in a doom loop

    While there is definitely an exodus of millionaires - I know one or two who have already gone - the big risk is the brain drain of the young and ambitious.

    What's left in broken britain for people other than to be pay pigs for unproductive spongers and boat people? If you're in your 20s, bright, ambitious, you can stay in broken britain and be taxed to the eyeballs while being unable to ever save money to get on the property ladder (and be cheated at every turn if you finally do), or you can bugger off to Dubai, pay 0% tax and like as not avoid the graduate tax aka student loan while you're at it.

    It's not just the millionaires we'll lose over the next five years. It's the young and ambitious who can make more and pay less tax elsewhere.
    It probably won't be long before Rachel Thieves puts in place exchange controls. The basic problem is that Labour does not understand wealth creation. It is a party for the public sector, hence the reason why NHS consultants and senior managers will retire with tax-free pension pots of £2.5M, while wealth generators will have any sale of a business that they have built up taxed, taxed and more taxed!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    edited October 8
    Fishing said:

    Leon said:

    This poll again


    “🆕In today’s Playbook our latest @Moreincommon_ voting intention has Labour’s lead at 1 point

    🌹Lab 29% (-1)
    🌳Con 28% (+2)
    ➡️ Ref 19% (+1)
    🔶Lib Dem 11% (-2)
    🌎 Green 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    Dates: 5-7/10 n= 2023, changes with 24-25/9”


    What if the pollsters are STILL overstating Labour by 6-7 points?! We just don’t know. So the situation might REALLY be


    🌹Lab 22
    🌳Con 32
    ➡️ Ref 23
    🔶Lib Dem 11%
    🌎 Green 7%
    🟡 SNP 2%

    Labour THIRD

    I see we can add polling to the many subjects you know nothing about.

    Polls are at their most accurate after an election because the pollsters automatically ask people how they voted at the election, false recall isn't an issue at this point.
    Is there any evidence for that, or is it just an assertion? Are polls more accurate if the next election is a year or two after the last one rather than four or five years?

    And if false recall is the issue, why do polls overstate Labour far more often than the Conservatives, as opposed to getting things wrong randomly? Do one party's supporters have much worse memories than those of the other? As the Conservatives are older, maybe you'd think their supporters are more likely to forget how they voted, but then why was the general anti-Tory bias also prevalent when the age differential in voting was not so pronounced? And why is anti-Right wing bias also observable in other, though not all, democracies, where the age gap is also less pronounced if it exists?

    False recall could be caused by people not wanting to admit to themselves or the pollster how they voted last time, rather than genuinely forgetting, just as the membership of the French Resistance grew exponentially after Liberation. In which case it is likely to be a function of current party popularity, rather than the time since the last election.

    No answers here, only questions.
    The online pollsters generally in the week after the election asks their panel how they voted so they base their polling on that.

    The further we get away from an election the more false recall becomes an issue, even for online pollsters.

    This is based on conversation I’ve had with pollsters.
This discussion has been closed.