Jim Pickard @pickardje.bsky.social · 3m Dale Vince, the green energy tycoon and Labour mega-donor, has confirmed his interest in buying the Observer from Guardian Media Group, offering bosses at the newspaper a potential alternative if a deal agreed with James Harding’s Tortoise collapses
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
But they're not ISIS, or Assad - and they are said to contain pragmatists. FWIW.
If they do occupy Aleppo for any length of time, we'll get to find out what they are.
Well, there are pragmatists and pragmatists. Assad is a pragmatist in some ways.
He really is the pits of the earth. I hope he falls almost regardless of how it happens and what replaces him.
Could end up with Libya or Iraq 2.0. Seems they're all horrible, Its just the Russians/Iranians/Hezbollah are on the other side, so we'll arm this faction of head choppers.
Syria just seems another reason to invoke Gove's fallacy: "creating something is as easy as destroying it"
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
If you want to enable it for anyone who so expresses a desire, how is that not suicide?
Everyone dies.
Suicide is generally an impulsive decision to end one's life often taken without discussion with anyone else, or any safeguards, potentially during a mental snap.
Assisted dying is a clinical, deliberate, cold and considered end to life.
“That was when something incredible happened. The cortex turned from grey to pink. Brain cells started producing proteins. Neurons juddered back to life, displaying signs of metabolic activity indistinguishable from that of living cells. Basic cellular functions, activities that were supposed to irreversibly cease after blood flow stopped, were restored. The pig’s brain wasn’t alive, exactly – but it certainly wasn’t dead.
Now, for the first time, the team is using the technique on human brains”.
Turnout in some rural areas of Mayo now approaching 40%. Our local polling station was reported to be "busy" earlier this afternoon, though I haven't voted yet.
The exit poll last time wasn't too bad, correctly predicting the Greens to come a solid fourth, and having the big three parties within 0.2% of each other, when the spread was 3.6%.
So if it's as close as the last pre-election polls predicted it could well get the order of the parties wrong.
Do you think turnout in Mayo will ketchup with the rest of the country?
If you keep that up, TSE will give you a dressing down.
Judging by his style I'm sure TSE can handle it getting a tad saucy.
“That was when something incredible happened. The cortex turned from grey to pink. Brain cells started producing proteins. Neurons juddered back to life, displaying signs of metabolic activity indistinguishable from that of living cells. Basic cellular functions, activities that were supposed to irreversibly cease after blood flow stopped, were restored. The pig’s brain wasn’t alive, exactly – but it certainly wasn’t dead.
Now, for the first time, the team is using the technique on human brains”.
Looks like there's more life in assisted resuscitation - did this feature in the debate? "the resuscitation technology involved raises the possibility of saving people on the cusp of death."
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
If you want to enable it for anyone who so expresses a desire, how is that not suicide?
I think with suicide, it is often done for reasons not obviously visible to those close to them. An addiction they have kept hidden, a love affair that has gone wrong, massive debts. Suicide is often difficult for loved ones to process; they feel they did something wrong, could have prevented it. At worst, it is seen as a very selfish act.
Assisted dying - if it is hedged around with the specified protections - will be a very public thing, where it will be easy to understand the reasons (if not always accepting of the course of that outcome). The event will be known about beforehand, people will have time to understand what is happening and why. And they will have an opportunity to say goodbye.
It is still suicide. You personally choose to end your life unnaturally, thereby shortening your life
This is not an argument against Assisted Dying. I am divided on this issue, and I accept that our MPs have chosen to approve it, and so be it - but let's not mince words. Assisted Dying is assisted suicide
Nostalgia is a big driver of this type of politics.
If progressives don’t want to generate nostalgia, they could just refrain from making things worse.
Mmm, all this modern world malarkey. It's understandable to yearn for a time machine. I do sometimes. All those different currencies there used to be. The thrill of getting your passport stamped at the French German border. The vibrantly coloured cigarette packets behind the counter at the corner shop. I do get it.
I think "Yes" is something that Elon says when someone tickles his numpty.
Latest from the Leeanderthal News Capsule, on the assisted dying bill:
Actually a good comment, about procedure and how LA has emailed out to 5.5k people (may not be a random selection), and received a response 80% in support of the Bill.
Nostalgia is a big driver of this type of politics.
If progressives don’t want to generate nostalgia, they could just refrain from making things worse.
Mmm, all this modern world malarkey. It's understandable to yearn for a time machine. I do sometimes. All those different currencies there used to be. The thrill of getting your passport stamped at the French German border. The vibrantly coloured cigarette packets behind the counter at the corner shop. I do get it.
It's the yearning for diversity, isn't it? Not this homogenised world where everywhere is like everywhere else.
Wow, the cabinet is now 100% state educated. Not a single private schooler.
"Now"? Has something just happened today which has brought this about? I don't mean to be rude - genuinely unsure if I've missed something.
Apologies, just seen Louise Haigh was privately educated. I didn't know that.
Wasn't she the one gloating online about the private education tax and stopping the schools, then the next day went off to play hockey at a private school, as she frequently does, having been privately educated?
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
But they're not ISIS, or Assad - and they are said to contain pragmatists. FWIW.
If they do occupy Aleppo for any length of time, we'll get to find out what they are.
Well, there are pragmatists and pragmatists. Assad is a pragmatist in some ways.
He really is the pits of the earth. I hope he falls almost regardless of how it happens and what replaces him.
Could end up with Libya or Iraq 2.0. Seems they're all horrible, Its just the Russians/Iranians/Hezbollah are on the other side, so we'll arm this faction of head choppers.
Syria just seems another reason to invoke Gove's fallacy: "creating something is as easy as destroying it"
Yes I'm just saying I hope he falls. Not arguing for the UK to do anything in particular.
“That was when something incredible happened. The cortex turned from grey to pink. Brain cells started producing proteins. Neurons juddered back to life, displaying signs of metabolic activity indistinguishable from that of living cells. Basic cellular functions, activities that were supposed to irreversibly cease after blood flow stopped, were restored. The pig’s brain wasn’t alive, exactly – but it certainly wasn’t dead.
Now, for the first time, the team is using the technique on human brains”.
Looks like there's more life in assisted resuscitation - did this feature in the debate? "the resuscitation technology involved raises the possibility of saving people on the cusp of death."
It’s why this debate is so complex. I would like to be in favour of assisted dying but there are so many complexities in legislating for it that I’d rather be a coward and leave it as a grey area for medics and families to nudge and wink through.
You don't need most voters to win in our system though...
It seems unlikely though, the LDs have struggled to break through the barrier and they attract tactical voters from left and right. Reform would have to displace the Conservatives or attract another swathe of Labour voters. Even distribution of votes isn't much use to them in winning seats.
The Lib Dems' strategic error continues to be to micro-target, which is fine on a micro level but breaks down at a national one because it results in a weak brand message, due to the need to not cut across the contradictions at local level and and because if the party does end up in power, those contradictions become all too apparent (and local work is insufficient to act as a guard against the backlash). It is something of a frustration that the party considers Liverpool in the 1970s to be a better guide to strategy than the experience of the 2010s. Particularly when there are plenty of alternative parties these days, and there's an empty space for a liberal party to advocate its own ideology and the policies flowing from that.
However, that is not a mistake Reform are making. They have their brand and are seeking positive votes off the back of it - albeit that their entire message is a negative one. However, it's against the system as a whole, not vote X to block Y.
The LibDems had to micro target as they couldn't get their voice heard nationally. National media wasn't interested until Davey started doing his stunts and that's not really a brand message! It just gets you seen.. A national campaign, without micro targeting, would have ended up like Reform's. A higher share but much fewer seats.
Now the LibDems have a presence and a national voice, I think we'll see stage two of the strategy - a national brand and appeal based on freedom of the individual (freedom to and freedom from) coupled with fairness and free of special interests, and underpinned by dedication to helping individual electors and competence in getting things done.
Where are the policies to support that appeal, though? The two topics they're most associated with right now are social care and water & sewerage - and that's great as far as it goes, almost everyone agrees that "something should be done" in those areas.
But what's missing is anything that's genuinely radical. They've let Labour make the running on HoL reform, the assisted dying bill came from Labour and Tory backbenchers, and they've managed to side with better-off pensioners and landowners in the recent debates about tax.
I get that their biggest opportunity at the moment is to chase after the votes of erstwhile 'solid' Tories - but it's coming at the cost of appearing almost to be Theresa May painted yellow with a few stunts added on top.
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
Wow, the cabinet is now 100% state educated. Not a single private schooler.
"Now"? Has something just happened today which has brought this about? I don't mean to be rude - genuinely unsure if I've missed something.
Apologies, just seen Louise Haigh was privately educated. I didn't know that.
Wasn't she the one gloating online about the private education tax and stopping the schools, then the next day went off to play hockey at a private school, as she frequently does, having been privately educated?
Can't believe Aleppo has fallen this quickly, but it is often the way I guess. A disaster for Russia and Iran. Not great for a lot of Syrians either, really no idea how this settles. Best stay out of it.
I doubt Trump's tariffs will make much difference to most UK voters even if no trade deal unless they work for companies that export a lot to the US. It might even see more switching to relatively cheaper British made produce if they buy some US products normally if the UK government imposes retaliatory tariffs on US imports. It will be a bigger impact on US consumers if they buy a lot of foreign made goods and the costs of those go up and Trump's gamble they will see US consumers buying more American made products the US he hopes produces more of does not pay off.
As for Reform getting into government, extremely unlikely on their own, a little more likely in a hung parliament but only if Farage does a deal with Badenoch's Tories
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
Wow, the cabinet is now 100% state educated. Not a single private schooler.
"Now"? Has something just happened today which has brought this about? I don't mean to be rude - genuinely unsure if I've missed something.
Apologies, just seen Louise Haigh was privately educated. I didn't know that.
Wasn't she the one gloating online about the private education tax and stopping the schools, then the next day went off to play hockey at a private school, as she frequently does, having been privately educated?
No, that was Bridget Phillipson.
Of course, thanks. Find the two of them interchangeable despite the hair. She said that private schools didn't need astroturf, then proceeded to play on astroturf on a private school pitch shortly after. Thanks for that.
Our new Transport Minister did a fun cycle ride around London based on streets on the Monopoly Board in 2020 (perfectly legally), and describes herself as a fair weather cyclist. We can probably all work with that.
We're gong to have to adjust to photographs changed to be marginally manic in a slightly different way.
Comments straight out of 2020, however. The helmet is a bit bowl of petunias (see Magrathea, whales in association with.)
I give the electorate minus the 20% of boneheads attracted to the hatred of Farage and his ilk more commonsense.
If Trump and Musk go full in Dystopian Right Wing destroying every convention and supporting the likes of Tommy Robinson,the vast majority will reject Farage as a puppet and roundly turn on what they see as treachery.
Farage may think Trump and Musk are an advantage for his neo Fascism.
They may find that the orange one and the son of apartheid are roundly rejected and despised by the vast majority in the UK.
Starmer also has the option for Trump and his brand of politics to be kicked out before he has to call a UK GE in July 2025.
I'd hope this is right but after the November 5th shocker I'm not as confident as you. National populism is having a moment and REF own the franchise in the UK. If the economy is bad at the time of the next GE all sorts of outcomes are possible inc PM Farage. A lot depends on how the Cons shape up.
Hm, a bit. But REF doesn't have too big a pool of CON voters to fish in. I suspect a large proportion of current REF voters wouldn't touch the Cons with a long stick, but there is a pool of LAB voters they will be going for. I'd say therefore it depends just as much on how LAB shape up.
Yes, but that (because they're in government) depends largely on the economy. All opposition parties need a struggling economy. Labour need a moderate to good one. They'll have 'shaped up' if that happens.
Here I think I am bumping up against your view that government decisions have little bearing on the success or otherwise of the economy. My view is that the government has the scope to make quite a difference. So if they can make the economy perform, they'll have shaped up. If they can't, they haven't. Not sure if we're agreeing or not!
Can't believe Aleppo has fallen this quickly, but it is often the way I guess. A disaster for Russia and Iran. Not great for a lot of Syrians either, really no idea how this settles. Best stay out of it.
The good news is we don’t need to do anything about it. And it’s shit news for Putin and the Ayatollahs, which should make us all happy.
Can't believe Aleppo has fallen this quickly, but it is often the way I guess. A disaster for Russia and Iran. Not great for a lot of Syrians either, really no idea how this settles. Best stay out of it.
The good news is we don’t need to do anything about it. And it’s shit news for Putin and the Ayatollahs, which should make us all happy.
Can't believe Aleppo has fallen this quickly, but it is often the way I guess. A disaster for Russia and Iran. Not great for a lot of Syrians either, really no idea how this settles. Best stay out of it.
The good news is we don’t need to do anything about it. And it’s shit news for Putin and the Ayatollahs, which should make us all happy.
The fall of the Ayatollahs would be magnificent news for the entire world. Evil c*nts
Nostalgia is a big driver of this type of politics.
If progressives don’t want to generate nostalgia, they could just refrain from making things worse.
Mmm, all this modern world malarkey. It's understandable to yearn for a time machine. I do sometimes. All those different currencies there used to be. The thrill of getting your passport stamped at the French German border. The vibrantly coloured cigarette packets behind the counter at the corner shop. I do get it.
It's the yearning for diversity, isn't it? Not this homogenised world where everywhere is like everywhere else.
Lol, ok. I'm imagining your Farage impression as you deliver that line. I bet it's a good one.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
I wonder if Assad is suffering a perfect storm here? The Russians desperate for men and equipment for Ukraine withdrawing strategic assets from Syria and Hezbollah, who were one of the mainstays of Syrian Government support, having been hammered and lost much of their senior command structure.
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
I wonder if Assad is suffering a perfect storm here? The Russians desperate for men and equipment for Ukraine withdrawing strategic assets from Syria and Hezbollah, who were one of the mainstays of Syrian Government support, having been hammered and lost much of their senior command structure.
That, and I wonder whether Israel and Ukraine have been coordinating a bit with lessons learned. I imagine many Israelis have lost their patience with Russia because of its emerging relationship with Iran.
I give the electorate minus the 20% of boneheads attracted to the hatred of Farage and his ilk more commonsense.
If Trump and Musk go full in Dystopian Right Wing destroying every convention and supporting the likes of Tommy Robinson,the vast majority will reject Farage as a puppet and roundly turn on what they see as treachery.
Farage may think Trump and Musk are an advantage for his neo Fascism.
They may find that the orange one and the son of apartheid are roundly rejected and despised by the vast majority in the UK.
Starmer also has the option for Trump and his brand of politics to be kicked out before he has to call a UK GE in July 2025.
I'd hope this is right but after the November 5th shocker I'm not as confident as you. National populism is having a moment and REF own the franchise in the UK. If the economy is bad at the time of the next GE all sorts of outcomes are possible inc PM Farage. A lot depends on how the Cons shape up.
Hm, a bit. But REF doesn't have too big a pool of CON voters to fish in. I suspect a large proportion of current REF voters wouldn't touch the Cons with a long stick, but there is a pool of LAB voters they will be going for. I'd say therefore it depends just as much on how LAB shape up.
Yes, but that (because they're in government) depends largely on the economy. All opposition parties need a struggling economy. Labour need a moderate to good one. They'll have 'shaped up' if that happens.
Here I think I am bumping up against your view that government decisions have little bearing on the success or otherwise of the economy. My view is that the government has the scope to make quite a difference. So if they can make the economy perform, they'll have shaped up. If they can't, they haven't. Not sure if we're agreeing or not!
With that caveat (that imo it's mainly outside factors that impact growth) we are, yes. Because shaped up vs deemed to have shaped up is the same thing really when it comes to the election.
You don't need most voters to win in our system though...
It seems unlikely though, the LDs have struggled to break through the barrier and they attract tactical voters from left and right. Reform would have to displace the Conservatives or attract another swathe of Labour voters. Even distribution of votes isn't much use to them in winning seats.
The Lib Dems' strategic error continues to be to micro-target, which is fine on a micro level but breaks down at a national one because it results in a weak brand message, due to the need to not cut across the contradictions at local level and and because if the party does end up in power, those contradictions become all too apparent (and local work is insufficient to act as a guard against the backlash). It is something of a frustration that the party considers Liverpool in the 1970s to be a better guide to strategy than the experience of the 2010s. Particularly when there are plenty of alternative parties these days, and there's an empty space for a liberal party to advocate its own ideology and the policies flowing from that.
However, that is not a mistake Reform are making. They have their brand and are seeking positive votes off the back of it - albeit that their entire message is a negative one. However, it's against the system as a whole, not vote X to block Y.
The LibDems had to micro target as they couldn't get their voice heard nationally. National media wasn't interested until Davey started doing his stunts and that's not really a brand message! It just gets you seen.. A national campaign, without micro targeting, would have ended up like Reform's. A higher share but much fewer seats.
Now the LibDems have a presence and a national voice, I think we'll see stage two of the strategy - a national brand and appeal based on freedom of the individual (freedom to and freedom from) coupled with fairness and free of special interests, and underpinned by dedication to helping individual electors and competence in getting things done.
Where are the policies to support that appeal, though? The two topics they're most associated with right now are social care and water & sewerage - and that's great as far as it goes, almost everyone agrees that "something should be done" in those areas.
But what's missing is anything that's genuinely radical. They've let Labour make the running on HoL reform, the assisted dying bill came from Labour and Tory backbenchers, and they've managed to side with better-off pensioners and landowners in the recent debates about tax.
I get that their biggest opportunity at the moment is to chase after the votes of erstwhile 'solid' Tories - but it's coming at the cost of appearing almost to be Theresa May painted yellow with a few stunts added on top.
Yes I get that. LibDems need policies that support individual freedom and personal autonomy in contrast with Labour and Tory nanny state tendency. Give people the information and support but leave the decision to them as adults. It's a pity the party couldn't provide a united front on today's bill. They almost did except for Ed Davey and a few others. I'd like to see the decriminalisation of drugs. Free movement. During Covid, I would have liked to see more support for flexibility on lock down.
@BartholomewRoberts would make a good consultant on LibDem policies. He should really join us.
You don't need most voters to win in our system though...
It seems unlikely though, the LDs have struggled to break through the barrier and they attract tactical voters from left and right. Reform would have to displace the Conservatives or attract another swathe of Labour voters. Even distribution of votes isn't much use to them in winning seats.
The Lib Dems' strategic error continues to be to micro-target, which is fine on a micro level but breaks down at a national one because it results in a weak brand message, due to the need to not cut across the contradictions at local level and and because if the party does end up in power, those contradictions become all too apparent (and local work is insufficient to act as a guard against the backlash). It is something of a frustration that the party considers Liverpool in the 1970s to be a better guide to strategy than the experience of the 2010s. Particularly when there are plenty of alternative parties these days, and there's an empty space for a liberal party to advocate its own ideology and the policies flowing from that.
However, that is not a mistake Reform are making. They have their brand and are seeking positive votes off the back of it - albeit that their entire message is a negative one. However, it's against the system as a whole, not vote X to block Y.
The LibDems had to micro target as they couldn't get their voice heard nationally. National media wasn't interested until Davey started doing his stunts and that's not really a brand message! It just gets you seen.. A national campaign, without micro targeting, would have ended up like Reform's. A higher share but much fewer seats.
Now the LibDems have a presence and a national voice, I think we'll see stage two of the strategy - a national brand and appeal based on freedom of the individual (freedom to and freedom from) coupled with fairness and free of special interests, and underpinned by dedication to helping individual electors and competence in getting things done.
Where are the policies to support that appeal, though? The two topics they're most associated with right now are social care and water & sewerage - and that's great as far as it goes, almost everyone agrees that "something should be done" in those areas.
But what's missing is anything that's genuinely radical. They've let Labour make the running on HoL reform, the assisted dying bill came from Labour and Tory backbenchers, and they've managed to side with better-off pensioners and landowners in the recent debates about tax.
I get that their biggest opportunity at the moment is to chase after the votes of erstwhile 'solid' Tories - but it's coming at the cost of appearing almost to be Theresa May painted yellow with a few stunts added on top.
I don't dispute the truth islands and sometimes quite large areas of LD strength are surrounded by oceans of weakness bordering on complete irrelevance but twas ever thus even in the supposed heyday of the mid-2000s.
I'd contend "radical" only gets you so far - the party supports land value taxation and electoral reform and they are a couple of, I would argue, quite radical changes from where we are.
It's also possible the electorate is tired of radical solutions and just wants quiet, competent Government (it may yet get it from Starmer despite the clamourings from those losing out).
As I argued last night, both the Conservatives and LDs (and Reform as well) are in the "oppose for the sack of opposing" mindset. We're the better part of four years from an election - working up detailed proposals on winter fuel allowance and IHT would be a waste of time and effort though I would recognise the status quo ante wasn't and wouldn't be sustainable.
Can't believe Aleppo has fallen this quickly, but it is often the way I guess. A disaster for Russia and Iran. Not great for a lot of Syrians either, really no idea how this settles. Best stay out of it.
The good news is we don’t need to do anything about it. And it’s shit news for Putin and the Ayatollahs, which should make us all happy.
All of this has been pretty well beyond our control since Bush Jnr's adventure in Iraq.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
You're quite keen on controlling other peoples' personal life choices, have you ever considered a career change to work for the Chinese state or other authoritarian regime? The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
And many on the left in fact. Eg Abbott and Corbyn.
You don't need most voters to win in our system though...
It seems unlikely though, the LDs have struggled to break through the barrier and they attract tactical voters from left and right. Reform would have to displace the Conservatives or attract another swathe of Labour voters. Even distribution of votes isn't much use to them in winning seats.
The Lib Dems' strategic error continues to be to micro-target, which is fine on a micro level but breaks down at a national one because it results in a weak brand message, due to the need to not cut across the contradictions at local level and and because if the party does end up in power, those contradictions become all too apparent (and local work is insufficient to act as a guard against the backlash). It is something of a frustration that the party considers Liverpool in the 1970s to be a better guide to strategy than the experience of the 2010s. Particularly when there are plenty of alternative parties these days, and there's an empty space for a liberal party to advocate its own ideology and the policies flowing from that.
However, that is not a mistake Reform are making. They have their brand and are seeking positive votes off the back of it - albeit that their entire message is a negative one. However, it's against the system as a whole, not vote X to block Y.
The LibDems had to micro target as they couldn't get their voice heard nationally. National media wasn't interested until Davey started doing his stunts and that's not really a brand message! It just gets you seen.. A national campaign, without micro targeting, would have ended up like Reform's. A higher share but much fewer seats.
Now the LibDems have a presence and a national voice, I think we'll see stage two of the strategy - a national brand and appeal based on freedom of the individual (freedom to and freedom from) coupled with fairness and free of special interests, and underpinned by dedication to helping individual electors and competence in getting things done.
Where are the policies to support that appeal, though? The two topics they're most associated with right now are social care and water & sewerage - and that's great as far as it goes, almost everyone agrees that "something should be done" in those areas.
But what's missing is anything that's genuinely radical. They've let Labour make the running on HoL reform, the assisted dying bill came from Labour and Tory backbenchers, and they've managed to side with better-off pensioners and landowners in the recent debates about tax.
I get that their biggest opportunity at the moment is to chase after the votes of erstwhile 'solid' Tories - but it's coming at the cost of appearing almost to be Theresa May painted yellow with a few stunts added on top.
Theresa May painted yellow is what most LD voters want now, given most LD seats are in the South and Home Counties, in areas with a Gail's and Waitrose.
They want nimbyism, they want their winter fuel allowance and in the rural parts the farmers want their IHT exemption.
Should be noted though a higher percentage of LD MPs voted for assisted dying than Labour MPs did and most Tory MPs voted against it
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
You're quite keen on controlling other peoples' personal life choices, have you ever considered a career change to work for the Chinese state or other authoritarian regime? The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
HYUFD is an illustration of the Tory nanny state mentality. Do as you're told children. We know best.
You don't need most voters to win in our system though...
It seems unlikely though, the LDs have struggled to break through the barrier and they attract tactical voters from left and right. Reform would have to displace the Conservatives or attract another swathe of Labour voters. Even distribution of votes isn't much use to them in winning seats.
The Lib Dems' strategic error continues to be to micro-target, which is fine on a micro level but breaks down at a national one because it results in a weak brand message, due to the need to not cut across the contradictions at local level and and because if the party does end up in power, those contradictions become all too apparent (and local work is insufficient to act as a guard against the backlash). It is something of a frustration that the party considers Liverpool in the 1970s to be a better guide to strategy than the experience of the 2010s. Particularly when there are plenty of alternative parties these days, and there's an empty space for a liberal party to advocate its own ideology and the policies flowing from that.
However, that is not a mistake Reform are making. They have their brand and are seeking positive votes off the back of it - albeit that their entire message is a negative one. However, it's against the system as a whole, not vote X to block Y.
The LibDems had to micro target as they couldn't get their voice heard nationally. National media wasn't interested until Davey started doing his stunts and that's not really a brand message! It just gets you seen.. A national campaign, without micro targeting, would have ended up like Reform's. A higher share but much fewer seats.
Now the LibDems have a presence and a national voice, I think we'll see stage two of the strategy - a national brand and appeal based on freedom of the individual (freedom to and freedom from) coupled with fairness and free of special interests, and underpinned by dedication to helping individual electors and competence in getting things done.
Where are the policies to support that appeal, though? The two topics they're most associated with right now are social care and water & sewerage - and that's great as far as it goes, almost everyone agrees that "something should be done" in those areas.
But what's missing is anything that's genuinely radical. They've let Labour make the running on HoL reform, the assisted dying bill came from Labour and Tory backbenchers, and they've managed to side with better-off pensioners and landowners in the recent debates about tax.
I get that their biggest opportunity at the moment is to chase after the votes of erstwhile 'solid' Tories - but it's coming at the cost of appearing almost to be Theresa May painted yellow with a few stunts added on top.
Theresa May painted yellow is what most LD voters want now, given most LD seats are in the South and Home Counties, in areas with a Gail's and Waitrose.
They want nimbyism, they want their winter fuel allowance and in the rural parts the farmers want their IHT exemption.
Should be noted though a higher percentage of LD MPs voted for assisted dying than Labour MPs did and most Tory MPs voted against it
Knowing as I do many Lib Dem voters in the South and Home Counties, most of them want to rejoin the EU.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
You're quite keen on controlling other peoples' personal life choices, have you ever considered a career change to work for the Chinese state or other authoritarian regime? The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
I am a Conservative, it comes with the label. If I wanted a free for all in people's personal life choices I would have joined the Liberal Democrats.
The public also back the death penalty quite regularly too but we have representative not direct democracy.
The public also oppose euthanasia for the mentally ill and for any reason, so we now use that and take the fight forward to stop the slippery slope Canada has seen
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
You're quite keen on controlling other peoples' personal life choices, have you ever considered a career change to work for the Chinese state or other authoritarian regime? The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
I am a Conservative, it comes with the label. If I wanted a free for all in people's personal life choices I would have joined the Liberal Democrats
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
You're quite keen on controlling other peoples' personal life choices, have you ever considered a career change to work for the Chinese state or other authoritarian regime? The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
HYUFD is an illustration of the Tory nanny state mentality. Do as you're told children. We know best.
He does at least possess a bit of old school Tory noblesse oblige. A step above the libertarian for me authoritarian for thee Muskites.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
And many on the left in fact. Eg Abbott and Corbyn.
Yes as they are not liberals either and on this I agree with Corbyn and Abbott and Badenoch and Farage and Johnson and not Starmer and Sunak and Cameron
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
You're quite keen on controlling other peoples' personal life choices, have you ever considered a career change to work for the Chinese state or other authoritarian regime? The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
HYUFD is an illustration of the Tory nanny state mentality. Do as you're told children. We know best.
He does at least possess a bit of old school Tory noblesse oblige. A step above the libertarian for me authoritarian for thee Muskites.
Yes - he is very polite and a gentleman (who knows what's good for us).
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
I wonder if Assad is suffering a perfect storm here? The Russians desperate for men and equipment for Ukraine withdrawing strategic assets from Syria and Hezbollah, who were one of the mainstays of Syrian Government support, having been hammered and lost much of their senior command structure.
Iran can step up support for him and Hezbollah.
To be fair I would prefer even Assad to the largely Islamic militant rebels who oppose him. Given Assad saw off ISIS in the end I am sure he will survive this more rag tag band
You don't need most voters to win in our system though...
It seems unlikely though, the LDs have struggled to break through the barrier and they attract tactical voters from left and right. Reform would have to displace the Conservatives or attract another swathe of Labour voters. Even distribution of votes isn't much use to them in winning seats.
The Lib Dems' strategic error continues to be to micro-target, which is fine on a micro level but breaks down at a national one because it results in a weak brand message, due to the need to not cut across the contradictions at local level and and because if the party does end up in power, those contradictions become all too apparent (and local work is insufficient to act as a guard against the backlash). It is something of a frustration that the party considers Liverpool in the 1970s to be a better guide to strategy than the experience of the 2010s. Particularly when there are plenty of alternative parties these days, and there's an empty space for a liberal party to advocate its own ideology and the policies flowing from that.
However, that is not a mistake Reform are making. They have their brand and are seeking positive votes off the back of it - albeit that their entire message is a negative one. However, it's against the system as a whole, not vote X to block Y.
The LibDems had to micro target as they couldn't get their voice heard nationally. National media wasn't interested until Davey started doing his stunts and that's not really a brand message! It just gets you seen.. A national campaign, without micro targeting, would have ended up like Reform's. A higher share but much fewer seats.
Now the LibDems have a presence and a national voice, I think we'll see stage two of the strategy - a national brand and appeal based on freedom of the individual (freedom to and freedom from) coupled with fairness and free of special interests, and underpinned by dedication to helping individual electors and competence in getting things done.
Where are the policies to support that appeal, though? The two topics they're most associated with right now are social care and water & sewerage - and that's great as far as it goes, almost everyone agrees that "something should be done" in those areas.
But what's missing is anything that's genuinely radical. They've let Labour make the running on HoL reform, the assisted dying bill came from Labour and Tory backbenchers, and they've managed to side with better-off pensioners and landowners in the recent debates about tax.
I get that their biggest opportunity at the moment is to chase after the votes of erstwhile 'solid' Tories - but it's coming at the cost of appearing almost to be Theresa May painted yellow with a few stunts added on top.
Theresa May painted yellow is what most LD voters want now, given most LD seats are in the South and Home Counties, in areas with a Gail's and Waitrose.
They want nimbyism, they want their winter fuel allowance and in the rural parts the farmers want their IHT exemption.
Should be noted though a higher percentage of LD MPs voted for assisted dying than Labour MPs did and most Tory MPs voted against it
Knowing as I do many Lib Dem voters in the South and Home Counties, most of them want to rejoin the EU.
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
If you want to enable it for anyone who so expresses a desire, how is that not suicide?
Everyone dies.
Suicide is generally an impulsive decision to end one's life often taken without discussion with anyone else, or any safeguards, potentially during a mental snap.
Assisted dying is a clinical, deliberate, cold and considered end to life.
They are not remotely the same thing.
Suicide is deliberately killing yourself. Which this is. There's no need to argue assisted dying isn't suicide in order to support it. I support it (I'm pleased it passed) but I don't know why you're drilling on this point.
Bart's support of this is sad..but not surprising as Cameron has come out in favour of it too..🧐🤨
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
Regarding assisted dying, why don't we simply copy the Swiss approach? It seems to work very well there. And right now, it's not like wealthy Brits can't head over there to top themselves.
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
Broadly, yes. Though note that there is no magic wall between Lab and Ref and votes can bleed between the two (and also between LD and Ref - the "Fuck 'em" vote which LDs used to monopolise), and that it is hard to vote tactically against a threat you can't see - much easier against a sitting MP. But I'd say even 6-1 feels generous at this stage.
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
I would add that Reform struggles to find decent candidates.
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
But they're not ISIS, or Assad - and they are said to contain pragmatists. FWIW.
If they do occupy Aleppo for any length of time, we'll get to find out what they are.
Well, there are pragmatists and pragmatists. Assad is a pragmatist in some ways.
He really is the pits of the earth. I hope he falls almost regardless of how it happens and what replaces him.
The last time he nearly fell, the alternative was even worse. Which is going some.
It's the Middle East.
The choice is always between the pretty dire and the utterly dismal. The trick is to tell which is which.
And the opposition in this case is a fairly disparate, ragtag grouping containing everything from “moderates” to full on jihadists. But TwiX is full of Musk-promoted Assadists who will tell you endlessly that this is the second coming of Isis, and their nonsense should be taken with a pinch of salt. Isis rather stole the Syria narrative with their opportunistic evil but there are plenty of rebels out there who just want to get rid of Assad.
Regarding assisted dying, why don't we simply copy the Swiss approach? It seems to work very well there. And right now, it's not like wealthy Brits can't head over there to top themselves.
If we market it well we could even make an export industry of it, like Switzerland does.
Put the clinic somewhere in Belgravia or Mayfair and call it “dignity”.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
And many on the left in fact. Eg Abbott and Corbyn.
Yes as they are not liberals either and on this I agree with Corbyn and Abbott and Badenoch and Farage and Johnson and not Starmer and Sunak and Cameron
I wonder what the Leave Remain split on AD would be. My hunch is Leavers a bit more anti.
Regarding assisted dying, why don't we simply copy the Swiss approach? It seems to work very well there. And right now, it's not like wealthy Brits can't head over there to top themselves.
Take the TGV to Zurich and jump off the roof of Dignitas?
I did a TV discussion round table format for an international channel earlier this week, discussing the new European Commission. Another guest was an American, and his hostility to the EU was matched only be what I can only describe as overconfidence. The point being that they want the EC to be weak and expect the EU to cave on every issue.
Throwing your weight around like this will not work with the EU and could equally infuriate the Brits too.
Its going to be a very rough ride. I do not think that the USA is going to be very popular in Britain or in the rest of Europe. Far from Reform winning the next GE, I could see people asking for Farage´s head on a spike. After all he does seem to prefer Russia and the USA to his own country and such craven treachery rarely works out well.
Just because Trump had a successful election does not mean that he will be successful in power, and failure isn´t going to make MAGA or its European useful idiots look too good in the end.
I get the right wing can´t wait to stick it to Labour, but the voters have just had 14 years of a mounting shit show from the Tories, and while I hold no brief for Labour, the idea that they need to be removed a bare three months after the General Election is not only mad, it is dangerous.
The combination of this and being close to Trump could lead, not to a triumphal return, but a massive blow back.
I don´t particularly like Starmer´s policies, but the Tories are playing with fire.
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
Broadly, yes. Though note that there is no magic wall between Lab and Ref and votes can bleed between the two (and also between LD and Ref - the "Fuck 'em" vote which LDs used to monopolise), and that it is hard to vote tactically against a threat you can't see - much easier against a sitting MP. But I'd say even 6-1 feels generous at this stage.
Absolutely: Reform appeals to the nationalist, traditionalist Labour vote. And they could definitely make further inroads there.
At the same time, other than being anti-immigration (which I admit is a large pool to swim in, given how much Boris Johnson messed up), Reform suffers from the same issue that Brexit did. Are we taking powers back so we can deregulate and become Singapore on the Thames? Or are we taking powers back so we can protect our industries (almost certainly through regulation)?
Reform's leadership seems to be from the former group, while its vote seems to come mostly from the latter. (Maybe that's not true: Farage could be in either group. And Trump seems to be on the protectionist side in the US.)
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
I would add that Reform struggles to find decent candidates.
There were some real doozies standing in July.
We had one in my constituency. Sweet kid, no doubt, and you kind of admired him for standing but he ought to have passed his statement of views to someone for proof-reading before putting it up on line.
Nevertheless, he got 6,000 votes and finished ahead of Labour, which suggests, if you didn't know it already, that Reform voters are not much bothered by the quality of their candidate, nor indeed by what they have to say about themselves.
If they're Reform, they're one of us, and that is all that matters.
One may mock, but it's the kind of approach that got Donald Trump a long way.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
You're quite keen on controlling other peoples' personal life choices, have you ever considered a career change to work for the Chinese state or other authoritarian regime? The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
HYUFD is an illustration of the Tory nanny state mentality. Do as you're told children. We know best.
"He's a font of misplaced rage. Name your cliché; mother held him too much or not enough, last picked at kickball, late night sneaky uncle, whatever. Now he's so angry moments of levity actually cause him pain; gives him headaches. Happiness, for that gentleman, hurts."
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
Broadly, yes. Though note that there is no magic wall between Lab and Ref and votes can bleed between the two (and also between LD and Ref - the "Fuck 'em" vote which LDs used to monopolise), and that it is hard to vote tactically against a threat you can't see - much easier against a sitting MP. But I'd say even 6-1 feels generous at this stage.
Absolutely delighted that assisted dying has passed this initial hurdle in the Commons, something I've supported for decades and glad this is a liberalisation that is belatedly happening.
Would like to see amendments in the Commons now, such as removing the 6 month restriction and enabling it for anyone who so expresses a desire even if not terminal such as people living in agony who could be trapped that way for years as has been discussed previously in the Courts.
Hopefully as it moves on more people will realise that assisted dying is NOT "suicide" and stop artificially conflating the two.
Yes, already Bart pushing for the slippery slope for assisted dying most likely even for mentally ill as well as non terminally ill.
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
You're quite keen on controlling other peoples' personal life choices, have you ever considered a career change to work for the Chinese state or other authoritarian regime? The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
I am a Conservative, it comes with the label. If I wanted a free for all in people's personal life choices ...
You do - you just want your own group's free for all controlling people's life choices.
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
I would add that Reform struggles to find decent candidates.
There were some real doozies standing in July.
We had one in my constituency. Sweet kid, no doubt, and you kind of admired him for standing but he ought to have passed his statement of views to someone for proof-reading before putting it up on line.
Nevertheless, he got 6,000 votes and finished ahead of Labour, which suggests, if you didn't know it already, that Reform voters are not much bothered by the quality of their candidate, nor indeed by what they have to say about themselves.
If they're Reform, they're one of us, and that is all that matters.
One may mock, but it's the kind of approach that got Donald Trump a long way.
A point of interest I have perhaps missed seeing discussed on PB, but hardly surprising, and quite normal for the SNP. Presumably the same is true of the other parties?
It's difficult to compare to turnout in 2020, because the election then was on a Saturday, but most observers are saying that turnout is heading to be well down on 2020. Never sure what that signifies - complacent satisfaction with the status quo, cynical apathy, or something else - but every vote that is cast will be more consequential as a result.
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
Broadly, yes. Though note that there is no magic wall between Lab and Ref and votes can bleed between the two (and also between LD and Ref - the "Fuck 'em" vote which LDs used to monopolise), and that it is hard to vote tactically against a threat you can't see - much easier against a sitting MP. But I'd say even 6-1 feels generous at this stage.
Absolutely: Reform appeals to the nationalist, traditionalist Labour vote. And they could definitely make further inroads there.
At the same time, other than being anti-immigration (which I admit is a large pool to swim in, given how much Boris Johnson messed up), Reform suffers from the same issue that Brexit did. Are we taking powers back so we can deregulate and become Singapore on the Thames? Or are we taking powers back so we can protect our industries (almost certainly through regulation)?
Reform's leadership seems to be from the former group, while its vote seems to come mostly from the latter. (Maybe that's not true: Farage could be in either group. And Trump seems to be on the protectionist side in the US.)
Considering Brexit got 52% of the vote, perhaps we should be taking that bet.
A point of interest I have perhaps missed seeing discussed on PB, but hardly surprising, and quite normal for the SNP. Presumably the same is true of the other parties?
I was under the impression that previously it hadn't been that normal and the SNP would find all manner of convoluted ways to justify voting on purely English legislation.
Regarding assisted dying, why don't we simply copy the Swiss approach? It seems to work very well there. And right now, it's not like wealthy Brits can't head over there to top themselves.
Interesting that Esther Ranzen noted the vote might mean that should her family accompany her to Switzerland (the law won't be on the statute book in time for her), they're less likely to be interviewed by the police on their return.
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
I would add that Reform struggles to find decent candidates.
There were some real doozies standing in July.
Did we ever get to the bottom of whether some were AI generated?
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
A couple of things to bear in mind on tactical voting.
Firstly, it gets harder if one of the parties in the tactical voting mosaic is an unpopular incumbent government. There's certainly a plausible scenario where tactical voting for Labour incumbents weakens considerably
Secondly, large vote swings make it hard for the potential tactical voter to know what the most effective tactical vote is.
That said, I broadly agree with your conclusion for different reasons. I think the distribution of Reform's voters suggests that around 100 seats is quite plausible, but beyond that becomes more difficult. The Lib Dems are in a similar position, and so I think most seats next time is likely to still come down to Tory v Labour, even if the two-party share falls below 50%.
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
Broadly, yes. Though note that there is no magic wall between Lab and Ref and votes can bleed between the two (and also between LD and Ref - the "Fuck 'em" vote which LDs used to monopolise), and that it is hard to vote tactically against a threat you can't see - much easier against a sitting MP. But I'd say even 6-1 feels generous at this stage.
It is. Ref most seats is 4.2 on betfair.
No, I didn't mean generous, I meant ungenerous! i.e. I think the true odds are more like 10-1.
I’d lay Reform for most seats at those prices. FPTP and the British political system generate a lot of momentum and I think, while possible, the likelihood of such a major shift from the current 2-party system is not very high. It’s happened once in the history of British politics (since parties came into formation).
While we could see an epochal change in British politics, with Reform doing very well and maybe getting most votes, they still wouldn’t necessarily get most seats. This year they managed the giddy heights of sixth most seats.
Moreover, Farage has a track record of not being able to keep a party together. There’s a non-zero probability that Reform have schismed before the next election, or that Farage gives up and does something else. Or indeed of Farage ending up in the Tories and just taking over the party from the inside, MAGA-style.
Labour got 29 seats in the 1906 general election, their first significant breakthrough in the Commons. They took until 1922 to come second in seats, and until 1929 to come first. I know politics moves quicker these days, but Reform UK to most seats is difficult under FPTP.
Assisted dying is somewhat inappropriate. Couldn't palliative care be called a form of assisted dying? It should be called assisted suicide. Why would anyone in favour of the move have a problem with that terminology?
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
If the allegations againast Gregg Wallace are now all in the open and that is the extent of it, then this is a ridiculous nothing-kebab, with a sauce of silliness
So he made ribald remarks. He's a cockney market trader. Piffling stupidity
Actually, gotta say, this is actually quite funny.
Republicans against Trump @RpsAgainstTrump · 19h Donald Trump has just posted this bizarre video on his social media accounts. It’s going to be four long years.
Unverified Reports that Russian Military Command Syria has ordered all Forces in the Northern Governorates of Aleppo and Idlib, to Withdraw away from the ongoing Rebel Offensive and towards the South.
We may now be witnessing the near Total Collapse of the Syrian Arab Army and Pro-Regime Militias in the Northwest of the Country; with the City of Aleppo expected to likely fall to Opposition Forces in the next few hours, as both the Russians and Iranians appear to be in Chaos.
But they're not ISIS, or Assad - and they are said to contain pragmatists. FWIW.
If they do occupy Aleppo for any length of time, we'll get to find out what they are.
Well, there are pragmatists and pragmatists. Assad is a pragmatist in some ways.
A friend had eye problems as a child and went to Moorfields a lot. Recently, her parents were throwing stuff out and dumped a pile of her old medical records on her. She looked through them, curious to remember the name of the nice eye doctor she remembered as a kid. Guess who it was?
The chances are that either they have torn themselves apart, or Farage has walked away, or that they remain clueless about fighting elections, come 2028.
Regarding assisted dying, why don't we simply copy the Swiss approach? It seems to work very well there. And right now, it's not like wealthy Brits can't head over there to top themselves.
If we market it well we could even make an export industry of it, like Switzerland does.
Put the clinic somewhere in Belgravia or Mayfair and call it “dignity”.
Just send them to Luton, Newent, Wick, the Scottish coalbelt, Cumbernauld, Newport or Swindon, and they will die of despair
I think it’s entirely plausible that Reform could win, or at least get most votes. It does require a lot to go their way, but I think people often underestimate the portion of the electorate who could be persuaded to vote for them. I suspect there is a ceiling because Farage, but I wouldn’t be comfortable to say that ceiling was definitely lower than, say, 35%. That has been enough to deliver parties a win under FPTP.
I find the argument that there’s just no way, pretty unconvincing.
I think it's entirely possible that Reform tops the vote in 2028/9. It's not odds on, by any means, but it's certainly no worse than a one-in-four shot.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
Broadly, yes. Though note that there is no magic wall between Lab and Ref and votes can bleed between the two (and also between LD and Ref - the "Fuck 'em" vote which LDs used to monopolise), and that it is hard to vote tactically against a threat you can't see - much easier against a sitting MP. But I'd say even 6-1 feels generous at this stage.
Absolutely: Reform appeals to the nationalist, traditionalist Labour vote. And they could definitely make further inroads there.
At the same time, other than being anti-immigration (which I admit is a large pool to swim in, given how much Boris Johnson messed up), Reform suffers from the same issue that Brexit did. Are we taking powers back so we can deregulate and become Singapore on the Thames? Or are we taking powers back so we can protect our industries (almost certainly through regulation)?
Reform's leadership seems to be from the former group, while its vote seems to come mostly from the latter. (Maybe that's not true: Farage could be in either group. And Trump seems to be on the protectionist side in the US.)
Considering Brexit got 52% of the vote, perhaps we should be taking that bet.
Less a good chunk now dead and another chunk now repentant
Regarding assisted dying, why don't we simply copy the Swiss approach? It seems to work very well there. And right now, it's not like wealthy Brits can't head over there to top themselves.
I doubt Trump's tariffs will make much difference to most UK voters even if no trade deal unless they work for companies that export a lot to the US. It might even see more switching to relatively cheaper British made produce if they buy some US products normally if the UK government imposes retaliatory tariffs on US imports. It will be a bigger impact on US consumers if they buy a lot of foreign made goods and the costs of those go up and Trump's gamble they will see US consumers buying more American made products the US he hopes produces more of does not pay off.
As for Reform getting into government, extremely unlikely on their own, a little more likely in a hung parliament but only if Farage does a deal with Badenoch's Tories
Trump’s tariffs could crash the global economy. UK voters would definitely notice that.
I doubt Trump's tariffs will make much difference to most UK voters even if no trade deal unless they work for companies that export a lot to the US. It might even see more switching to relatively cheaper British made produce if they buy some US products normally if the UK government imposes retaliatory tariffs on US imports. It will be a bigger impact on US consumers if they buy a lot of foreign made goods and the costs of those go up and Trump's gamble they will see US consumers buying more American made products the US he hopes produces more of does not pay off.
As for Reform getting into government, extremely unlikely on their own, a little more likely in a hung parliament but only if Farage does a deal with Badenoch's Tories
Trump’s tariffs could crash the global economy. UK voters would definitely notice that.
That comment shows how Thatcherite the left has become. You wouldn't bestow any other tax with magical powers to crash the global economy.
Comments
Jim Pickard @pickardje.bsky.social
·
3m
Dale Vince, the green energy tycoon and Labour mega-donor, has confirmed his interest in buying the Observer from Guardian Media Group, offering bosses at the newspaper a potential alternative if a deal agreed with James Harding’s Tortoise collapses
https://bsky.app/profile/pickardje.bsky.social/post/3lc45c3e62c2h
Syria just seems another reason to invoke Gove's fallacy: "creating something is as easy as destroying it"
"the resuscitation technology involved raises the possibility of saving people on the cusp of death."
This is not an argument against Assisted Dying. I am divided on this issue, and I accept that our MPs have chosen to approve it, and so be it - but let's not mince words. Assisted Dying is assisted suicide
I think "Yes" is something that Elon says when someone tickles his numpty.
Latest from the Leeanderthal News Capsule, on the assisted dying bill:
Actually a good comment, about procedure and how LA has emailed out to 5.5k people (may not be a random selection), and received a response 80% in support of the Bill.
Nice, pink tie. 1:14 second video.
https://x.com/LeeAndersonMP_/status/1862433193766297909
But what's missing is anything that's genuinely radical. They've let Labour make the running on HoL reform, the assisted dying bill came from Labour and Tory backbenchers, and they've managed to side with better-off pensioners and landowners in the recent debates about tax.
I get that their biggest opportunity at the moment is to chase after the votes of erstwhile 'solid' Tories - but it's coming at the cost of appearing almost to be Theresa May painted yellow with a few stunts added on top.
We've yet to find out what this lot will do in power.
It will be a bigger impact on US consumers if they buy a lot of foreign made goods and the costs of those go up and Trump's gamble they will see US consumers buying more American made products the US he hopes produces more of does not pay off.
As for Reform getting into government, extremely unlikely on their own, a little more likely in a hung parliament but only if Farage does a deal with Badenoch's Tories
Our new Transport Minister did a fun cycle ride around London based on streets on the Monopoly Board in 2020 (perfectly legally), and describes herself as a fair weather cyclist. We can probably all work with that.
We're gong to have to adjust to photographs changed to be marginally manic in a slightly different way.
Comments straight out of 2020, however. The helmet is a bit bowl of petunias (see Magrathea, whales in association with.)
https://x.com/Heidi_Labour/status/1343246146106486784
My view is that the government has the scope to make quite a difference. So if they can make the economy perform, they'll have shaped up. If they can't, they haven't.
Not sure if we're agreeing or not!
That is why we must pray Polievre's Conservatives win the Canadian election next year as they have promised to start cutting back on the near free for all access to assisted dying under Trudeau's Liberal and NDP government.
Given most Tory MPs and Farage and the DUP and TUV and UUP voted against assisted dying today hopefully the right will also be ready for a pushback when returned to power again
It's a pity the party couldn't provide a united front on today's bill. They almost did except for Ed Davey and a few others.
I'd like to see the decriminalisation of drugs.
Free movement.
During Covid, I would have liked to see more support for flexibility on lock down.
@BartholomewRoberts would make a good consultant on LibDem policies. He should really join us.
I'd contend "radical" only gets you so far - the party supports land value taxation and electoral reform and they are a couple of, I would argue, quite radical changes from where we are.
It's also possible the electorate is tired of radical solutions and just wants quiet, competent Government (it may yet get it from Starmer despite the clamourings from those losing out).
As I argued last night, both the Conservatives and LDs (and Reform as well) are in the "oppose for the sack of opposing" mindset. We're the better part of four years from an election - working up detailed proposals on winter fuel allowance and IHT would be a waste of time and effort though I would recognise the status quo ante wasn't and wouldn't be sustainable.
The polling was that the public is majorly in favour, the principle that assisted dying is legal will be allowed won't be reversed.
They want nimbyism, they want their winter fuel allowance and in the rural parts the farmers want their IHT exemption.
Should be noted though a higher percentage of LD MPs voted for assisted dying than Labour MPs did and most Tory MPs voted against it
The public also back the death penalty quite regularly too but we have representative not direct democracy.
The public also oppose euthanasia for the mentally ill and for any reason, so we now use that and take the fight forward to stop the slippery slope Canada has seen
To be fair I would prefer even Assad to the largely Islamic militant rebels who oppose him. Given Assad saw off ISIS in the end I am sure he will survive this more rag tag band
The choice is always between the pretty dire and the utterly dismal. The trick is to tell which is which.
Getting most seats, however, is going to be a tougher ask: not impossible by any means, but tougher. Which makes the 4-1 or so on offer not particularly attractive:
(1) The left and left of centre vote is extremely efficiently distributed. In the shires, county towns, and wealthy suburbs, then Labour voters vote LibDem tactically. In other places, LibDems vote Labour. (And we should add in the Greens here too.)
(2) You can tactically vote against parties in the UK. Look at Scotland in 1997. The Conservatives got almost 20% of the vote... and no seats. The LibDems were fourth in vote share, and second in seat share. I think it's entirely possible that some LibDem, Green and Labour voters would vote tactically for Conservatives to prevent a Reform win in their constituency.
(3) Reform doesn't (yet) have a local councillor base. Now this may change come the locals next year. In the UK system, councillors are a useful asset: they mean you know where your voters are, it means you have volunteers to draw from, and it makes you a credible option. (Against that: if you gain control of a council and fuck it up...)
I would make Reform 3-1 to win most votes next time around, but would probably want 6-1 on them getting most seats. Still: this is FPTP, and very chaotic results are entirely possible, particularly if the Greens also get into double digits, so I wouldn't count them out.
Attendees ‘horrified’ after construction awards hires models in skin-tight hi-vis costumes
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/11/29/on-the-tools-sexism-row-hire-female-performers-skin-tight/
But I'd say even 6-1 feels generous at this stage.
There were some real doozies standing in July.
Put the clinic somewhere in Belgravia or Mayfair and call it “dignity”.
Throwing your weight around like this will not work with the EU and could equally infuriate the Brits too.
Its going to be a very rough ride. I do not think that the USA is going to be very popular in Britain or in the rest of Europe. Far from Reform winning the next GE, I could see people asking for Farage´s head on a spike. After all he does seem to prefer Russia and the USA to his own country and such craven treachery rarely works out well.
Just because Trump had a successful election does not mean that he will be successful in power, and failure isn´t going to make MAGA or its European useful idiots look too good in the end.
I get the right wing can´t wait to stick it to Labour, but the voters have just had 14 years of a mounting shit show from the Tories, and while I hold no brief for Labour, the idea that they need to be removed a bare three months after the General Election is not only mad, it is dangerous.
The combination of this and being close to Trump could lead, not to a triumphal return, but a massive blow back.
I don´t particularly like Starmer´s policies, but the Tories are playing with fire.
At the same time, other than being anti-immigration (which I admit is a large pool to swim in, given how much Boris Johnson messed up), Reform suffers from the same issue that Brexit did. Are we taking powers back so we can deregulate and become Singapore on the Thames? Or are we taking powers back so we can protect our industries (almost certainly through regulation)?
Reform's leadership seems to be from the former group, while its vote seems to come mostly from the latter. (Maybe that's not true: Farage could be in either group. And Trump seems to be on the protectionist side in the US.)
Nevertheless, he got 6,000 votes and finished ahead of Labour, which suggests, if you didn't know it already, that Reform voters are not much bothered by the quality of their candidate, nor indeed by what they have to say about themselves.
If they're Reform, they're one of us, and that is all that matters.
One may mock, but it's the kind of approach that got Donald Trump a long way.
(At least in certain constituencies, of course).
A point of interest I have perhaps missed seeing discussed on PB, but hardly surprising, and quite normal for the SNP. Presumably the same is true of the other parties?
There's no trick.
Firstly, it gets harder if one of the parties in the tactical voting mosaic is an unpopular incumbent government. There's certainly a plausible scenario where tactical voting for Labour incumbents weakens considerably
Secondly, large vote swings make it hard for the potential tactical voter to know what the most effective tactical vote is.
That said, I broadly agree with your conclusion for different reasons. I think the distribution of Reform's voters suggests that around 100 seats is quite plausible, but beyond that becomes more difficult. The Lib Dems are in a similar position, and so I think most seats next time is likely to still come down to Tory v Labour, even if the two-party share falls below 50%.
Zelenskyy suggests he's prepared to end Ukraine war in return for NATO membership, even if Russia doesn't immediately return seized land
The pledge was central to Labour's election campaign, and was the top promise of SKS's "Five Missions".
Less than 150 days into power, it's been dumped.
Explaining to do from his fans on here methinks
While we could see an epochal change in British politics, with Reform doing very well and maybe getting most votes, they still wouldn’t necessarily get most seats. This year they managed the giddy heights of sixth most seats.
Moreover, Farage has a track record of not being able to keep a party together. There’s a non-zero probability that Reform have schismed before the next election, or that Farage gives up and does something else. Or indeed of Farage ending up in the Tories and just taking over the party from the inside, MAGA-style.
Labour got 29 seats in the 1906 general election, their first significant breakthrough in the Commons. They took until 1922 to come second in seats, and until 1929 to come first. I know politics moves quicker these days, but Reform UK to most seats is difficult under FPTP.
So he made ribald remarks. He's a cockney market trader. Piffling stupidity
Reform: 26.5%
Labour: 22.5%
Conservative: 22.5%
Lib Dem: 15%
Green: 7%
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=N&CON=22.5&LAB=22.5&LIB=15&Reform=26.5&Green=7&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTReform=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2024
Republicans against Trump
@RpsAgainstTrump
·
19h
Donald Trump has just posted this bizarre video on his social media accounts. It’s going to be four long years.
https://x.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1862292326258765898
The chances are that either they have torn themselves apart, or Farage has walked away, or that they remain clueless about fighting elections, come 2028.