Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
Yes, agreed. The LDs stand to become very grumpy about FPTP again in 2029 as it is right now
Scoop: The Department of Homeland Security on Thursday will tell hundreds of thousands of migrants that their permission to live and work in the United States had been revoked and they should leave the country, according to a copy of the notice.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
You're the one who isn't serious. You called everyone gammons for banging on about immigration, then when Sir Useless had his 'send them back' moment for all of 48 hours you became a sudden convert to mass deportation.
@BartholomewRoberts the US wont strike Iran they will get Israel to do their dirty work so Trump can pretend he isn’t starting a new war in the middle east
And because TACO Trump is too chickenshit to do it himself.
Hopefully Israel are not.
Will noone rid us of these turbulent Mullahs?
And more Israelis and Iranians will die
People are dying either way.
Iran are the root of most of the evil in the Middle East. There will never be a peaceful Middle East as long as they're there.
The choice when faced by evil is to confront it, or do nothing.
All it takes for evil to triumph is good to do nothing.
TACO Trump is no longer on the side of good though.
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
If they can achieve cut through as the sensible alternative to Reform, with Tories and Labour utterly discredited, the sky is the limit.
Otherwise, they are limited by UNS in not being competitive, on a straight swing basis, in that many seats.
But far too many commentators are clinging to UNS as if we’re still in Bob Mackenzie’s 1960-70s GEs, whereas the truth is that UNS, despite being easy to use and calculate, really doesn’t work any more (cf. the PB’er consensus on LD seats the last time around).
The most favourable scenario for the LibDems is if scores of former Labour voters become disillusioned and are looking for some other non-right wing party to vote for.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
Opinion. How do you know nobody is listening, have you asked them? And who says the programme is 'stable'? You? 0.7 growth to 0.3 contraction in 2 months isnt stable, quarter of a million fewer jobs isnt stable, u turns aren't stable, inflation rising well above target isn't stable. Its a matter of opinion, and perspective
Massive scandal in Hungary 🇭🇺 Georg Spöttle, Orban's "best pundit" who has been influencing public opinion for years now, turned out to be a foreign agent (ruzzia), and his handler is colonel Oleg Smirnov (GRU)
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
If they can achieve cut through as the sensible alternative to Reform, with Tories and Labour utterly discredited, the sky is the limit.
Otherwise, they are limited by UNS in not being competitive, on a straight swing basis, in that many seats.
But far too many commentators are clinging to UNS as if we’re still in Bob Mackenzie’s 1960-70s GEs, whereas the truth is that UNS, despite being easy to use and calculate, really doesn’t work any more.
The most favourable scenario for the LibDems is if scores of former Labour voters become disillusioned and are looking for some other non-right wing party to vote for.
What policies do the Lib Dems have that are in any way a new departure from the 27 odd years of Blairite ones that have got us here?
@BartholomewRoberts the US wont strike Iran they will get Israel to do their dirty work so Trump can pretend he isn’t starting a new war in the middle east
And because TACO Trump is too chickenshit to do it himself.
Hopefully Israel are not.
Will noone rid us of these turbulent Mullahs?
And more Israelis and Iranians will die
People are dying either way.
Iran are the root of most of the evil in the Middle East. There will never be a peaceful Middle East as long as they're there.
The choice when faced by evil is to confront it, or do nothing.
All it takes for evil to triumph is good to do nothing.
TACO Trump is no longer on the side of good though.
What proportion of 'the evil' are Saudi Arabia responsible for?
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
Well it's all part of the squinting, but you're right of course. Lib Dems always lose some seats even when doing well. But the local elections were very encouraging for the orange team - aside from a couple of shockers (hello Teignbridge) most results in held seats were between solid and spectacular.
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Have you any idea that amount of trouble Iran causes in the Middle East? I know Israel are seen by many as the bad guys; but Iran is, if anything, far worse. They are utterly destabilising the region.
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
Well it's all part of the squinting, but you're right of course. Lib Dems always lose some seats even when doing well. But the local elections were very encouraging for the orange team - aside from a couple of shockers (hello Teignbridge) most results in held seats were between solid and spectacular.
They were dropping Witney and Maidenhead i think from memory on the ward results but yeah they had a cracking set of results in May generally. How that translates to a GE of course..... istr they lost Eastleigh despite holding every council seat a few years back
@BartholomewRoberts the US wont strike Iran they will get Israel to do their dirty work so Trump can pretend he isn’t starting a new war in the middle east
And because TACO Trump is too chickenshit to do it himself.
Hopefully Israel are not.
Will noone rid us of these turbulent Mullahs?
And more Israelis and Iranians will die
People are dying either way.
Iran are the root of most of the evil in the Middle East. There will never be a peaceful Middle East as long as they're there.
The choice when faced by evil is to confront it, or do nothing.
All it takes for evil to triumph is good to do nothing.
TACO Trump is no longer on the side of good though.
What proportion of 'the evil' are Saudi Arabia responsible for?
Far too much. That's why I said most, not all.
That they're supposedly our allies makes me feel sick, but it makes a sick sense like allying with Stalin in the war in an "enemy of my enemy" sense. No more than that.
At least they're not directly funding and weaponising terrorism and groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, though they encourage it with Wahhabism.
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Only to a Farage premiership, if the Tories effectively were near annihilated at the next general election with about 2/3 of the rump Tories going Reform and the remaining 1/3 LD which could be enough for the LDs to overtake Labour unless Labour squeezed the Greens too
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
Well it's all part of the squinting, but you're right of course. Lib Dems always lose some seats even when doing well. But the local elections were very encouraging for the orange team - aside from a couple of shockers (hello Teignbridge) most results in held seats were between solid and spectacular.
They were dropping Witney and Maidenhead i think from memory on the ward results but yeah they had a cracking set of results in May generally. How that translates to a GE of course..... istr they lost Eastleigh despite holding every council seat a few years back
My mistake, just Witney, and they picked up a couple in Devon and Wilts/Shropshire on ward results
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Have you any idea that amount of trouble Iran causes in the Middle East? I know Israel are seen by many as the bad guys; but Iran is, if anything, far worse. They are utterly destabilising the region.
As is Israel at the moment. Look at Syria and Lebanon.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
@BartholomewRoberts the US wont strike Iran they will get Israel to do their dirty work so Trump can pretend he isn’t starting a new war in the middle east
And because TACO Trump is too chickenshit to do it himself.
Hopefully Israel are not.
Will noone rid us of these turbulent Mullahs?
And more Israelis and Iranians will die
People are dying either way.
Iran are the root of most of the evil in the Middle East. There will never be a peaceful Middle East as long as they're there.
The choice when faced by evil is to confront it, or do nothing.
All it takes for evil to triumph is good to do nothing.
TACO Trump is no longer on the side of good though.
What proportion of 'the evil' are Saudi Arabia responsible for?
And what percentage the USA, and what percentage the UK?
I hope we stay out of this one. Is there a Mid East intervention that's worked out to our credit in the last 100 years?
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
If they can achieve cut through as the sensible alternative to Reform, with Tories and Labour utterly discredited, the sky is the limit.
Otherwise, they are limited by UNS in not being competitive, on a straight swing basis, in that many seats.
But far too many commentators are clinging to UNS as if we’re still in Bob Mackenzie’s 1960-70s GEs, whereas the truth is that UNS, despite being easy to use and calculate, really doesn’t work any more (cf. the PB’er consensus on LD seats the last time around).
The most favourable scenario for the LibDems is if scores of former Labour voters become disillusioned and are looking for some other non-right wing party to vote for.
The Lib Dems are still suffering from the coalition. I think the Greens are more likely to be the beneficiaries of a collapse in the Labour vote.
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Have you any idea that amount of trouble Iran causes in the Middle East? I know Israel are seen by many as the bad guys; but Iran is, if anything, far worse. They are utterly destabilising the region.
As is Israel at the moment. Look at Syria and Lebanon.
Seems to me like they're fighting Islamists and terrorists there.
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Only to a Farage premiership, if the Tories effectively were near annihilated at the next general election with about 2/3 of the rump Tories going Reform and the remaining 1/3 LD which could be enough for the LDs to overtake Labour unless Labour squeezed the Greens too
If the Tories vaporise and without a Plaid Cymru candidate in Epping Forest where do you go?
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Have you any idea that amount of trouble Iran causes in the Middle East? I know Israel are seen by many as the bad guys; but Iran is, if anything, far worse. They are utterly destabilising the region.
As is Israel at the moment. Look at Syria and Lebanon.
Seems to me like they're fighting Islamists and terrorists there.
That should be our side, not destabilising.
I don't think we should side with genocide, on either side.
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
Here's the thing: if it's
Reform 30% Con 20% Lab 20% LibDem 20%
Then, I could easily see the LibDems in the official opposition spot, because they have the enormous benefit of getting bugger all share in half the country. The LibDems could easily lose their deposits in 300 seats, and that means their 20% national share goes a long way in the other half of the country.
Don't forget, too, that in this scenario the Labour Party would have lost 40% of their vote, and the Conservatives another fifth.
Reform - even if their vote share was relatively inefficient - would likely get a small majority, and I think it's far from impossible the LibDems would be second with 100-140 seats.
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
If they can achieve cut through as the sensible alternative to Reform, with Tories and Labour utterly discredited, the sky is the limit.
Otherwise, they are limited by UNS in not being competitive, on a straight swing basis, in that many seats.
But far too many commentators are clinging to UNS as if we’re still in Bob Mackenzie’s 1960-70s GEs, whereas the truth is that UNS, despite being easy to use and calculate, really doesn’t work any more (cf. the PB’er consensus on LD seats the last time around).
The most favourable scenario for the LibDems is if scores of former Labour voters become disillusioned and are looking for some other non-right wing party to vote for.
The Lib Dems are still suffering from the coalition. I think the Greens are more likely to be the beneficiaries of a collapse in the Labour vote.
I'd agree with that. If Labour collapses, their left flank will go Green, and their right flank Reform. The Lib Dems will pick up only scraps from the middle.
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Ukraine weren't going around sparking conflicts, backing terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah. Oh or seeking WMDs.
Not getting WMDs is a little bit like a young lady wearing revealing clothes: it's asking for trouble. Frankly, if you want to avoid the indignity of being invaded, then cover up and get some nukes.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Ukraine weren't going around sparking conflicts, backing terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah. Oh or seeking WMDs.
Not getting WMDs is a little bit like a young lady wearing revealing clothes: it's asking for trouble. Frankly, if you want to avoid the indignity of being invaded, then cover up and get some nukes.
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Ukraine weren't going around sparking conflicts, backing terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah. Oh or seeking WMDs.
Not getting WMDs is a little bit like a young lady wearing revealing clothes: it's asking for trouble. Frankly, if you want to avoid the indignity of being invaded, then cover up and get some nukes.
Although Israel has had nukes for the past nearly 60 years and that hasn't stopped Iran routinely sending weapons and attacks against them.
It would be about bloody time for Israel to hit back at the source of the conflict.
🚨 🍸Just how bad are the Tories woes? This bad: In our new poll of favourite Summer Tipples they have *lost* their lead with Pimms drinkers. Meanwhile Reform’s biggest lead is among cider chuggers, Labour with Frozen Marg fans & Tories now only lead with Aperol Spritz quaffers
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Ukraine weren't going around sparking conflicts, backing terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah. Oh or seeking WMDs.
Not getting WMDs is a little bit like a young lady wearing revealing clothes: it's asking for trouble. Frankly, if you want to avoid the indignity of being invaded, then cover up and get some nukes.
Not your finest metaphor, if I may say so.
The purpose of the metaphor was to mock people who say "well, she was asking for it, going out in a skirt like that"
Who could have guessed? Who could have guessed that a bunch of shrill wanky lefties putting themselves in a hideous Woke silo would end up with them all shouting at each other, like a smelly, grotesque cabal of banshees, then slowly, guiltily, slinking back to X?
Who could have guessed? Who could have guessed that a bunch of shrill wanky lefties putting themselves in a hideous Woke silo would end up with them all shouting at each other, like a smelly, grotesque cabal of banshees, then slowly, guiltily, slinking back to X?
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
Here's the thing: if it's
Reform 30% Con 20% Lab 20% LibDem 20%
Then, I could easily see the LibDems in the official opposition spot, because they have the enormous benefit of getting bugger all share in half the country. The LibDems could easily lose their deposits in 300 seats, and that means their 20% national share goes a long way in the other half of the country.
Don't forget, too, that in this scenario the Labour Party would have lost 40% of their vote, and the Conservatives another fifth.
Reform - even if their vote share was relatively inefficient - would likely get a small majority, and I think it's far from impossible the LibDems would be second with 100-140 seats.
If any party gets the right votes in the right places...... its not a likely outcome but mathematically possible
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 13m I repeat: the scenario of the two main parties ending up being Reform & the Tories is underpriced.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 3m Reform vs Lib Dems is also plausible. As things stand, we don't have a strong reason to believe Labour must survive as one of the main two parties if Reform gets to be one of them.
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
Here's the thing: if it's
Reform 30% Con 20% Lab 20% LibDem 20%
Then, I could easily see the LibDems in the official opposition spot, because they have the enormous benefit of getting bugger all share in half the country. The LibDems could easily lose their deposits in 300 seats, and that means their 20% national share goes a long way in the other half of the country.
Don't forget, too, that in this scenario the Labour Party would have lost 40% of their vote, and the Conservatives another fifth.
Reform - even if their vote share was relatively inefficient - would likely get a small majority, and I think it's far from impossible the LibDems would be second with 100-140 seats.
If any party gets the right votes in the right places...... its not a likely outcome but mathematically possible
With that vote share, I think the LibDems would be favorites to the opposition, because the Conservative vote would be too inefficiently distributed (far too even across the country), while much of Labour's remaining votes would be in places where Reform was strongest.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 13m I repeat: the scenario of the two main parties ending up being Reform & the Tories is underpriced.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 3m Reform vs Lib Dems is also plausible. As things stand, we don't have a strong reason to believe Labour must survive as one of the main two parties if Reform gets to be one of them.
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Ukraine weren't going around sparking conflicts, backing terrorists like Hamas and Hezbollah. Oh or seeking WMDs.
Not getting WMDs is a little bit like a young lady wearing revealing clothes: it's asking for trouble. Frankly, if you want to avoid the indignity of being invaded, then cover up and get some nukes.
Not your finest metaphor, if I may say so.
The purpose of the metaphor was to mock people who say "well, she was asking for it, going out in a skirt like that"
Yes, though subtlety doesn't often work well on the Internet.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
I didn't vote for Johnson when I was a member, supported Sunak not Truss, do not support the triple lock nor WFP for wealthy pensioners
I hoped Starmer's pledge for honesty and integrity would manifest itself once in government but he has failed to live upto those expectations and as for Reeves words fail me much like they did in Truss's 6 weeks
And yes, Labour are in government and nearly one year on with a litany of bad decisions they have only themselves to blame
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 13m I repeat: the scenario of the two main parties ending up being Reform & the Tories is underpriced.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 3m Reform vs Lib Dems is also plausible. As things stand, we don't have a strong reason to believe Labour must survive as one of the main two parties if Reform gets to be one of them.
If the latter turns out to happen then it seems Reeves single-handedly destroyed the Labour party with one budget.
Wishful thinking. There is a good 25% at least metropolitan liberal types who will either vote Labour if push comes to shove or another liberal type party. Could be Lib Dems could be Greens. Impossible to say right now
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
Here's the thing: if it's
Reform 30% Con 20% Lab 20% LibDem 20%
Then, I could easily see the LibDems in the official opposition spot, because they have the enormous benefit of getting bugger all share in half the country. The LibDems could easily lose their deposits in 300 seats, and that means their 20% national share goes a long way in the other half of the country.
Don't forget, too, that in this scenario the Labour Party would have lost 40% of their vote, and the Conservatives another fifth.
Reform - even if their vote share was relatively inefficient - would likely get a small majority, and I think it's far from impossible the LibDems would be second with 100-140 seats.
Presumably in this scenario there would be a lot of tactical votes cast for the LDs by natural Labour and Con voters. So yes, I could see them getting 100 plus seats and Davey becoming LOTO.
We are a long way off an election though and rere is much to be played out before then.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Not going to take lectures on “value for money” from someone who doesn’t believe in climate change and still thinks Brexit was a good idea
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 13m I repeat: the scenario of the two main parties ending up being Reform & the Tories is underpriced.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 3m Reform vs Lib Dems is also plausible. As things stand, we don't have a strong reason to believe Labour must survive as one of the main two parties if Reform gets to be one of them.
If the latter turns out to happen then it seems Reeves single-handedly destroyed the Labour party with one budget.
Tbf the Tories are a few points recovery from being second with Labour languishing. A Labour plunge could see that happen too if the economy cracks. The Tory/Labour battle leaving Reform out is similar to the situation after Paterson and parties but pre Pincher and the endgame but with Labour struggling to hold votes as incumbents this time. Its just a bigger boy sits atop, too
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Not going to take lectures on “value for money” from someone who doesn’t believe in climate change and still thinks Brexit was a good idea
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Not going to take lectures on “value for money” from someone who doesn’t believe in climate change and still thinks Brexit was a good idea
Who could have guessed? Who could have guessed that a bunch of shrill wanky lefties putting themselves in a hideous Woke silo would end up with them all shouting at each other, like a smelly, grotesque cabal of banshees, then slowly, guiltily, slinking back to X?
Oh look you’re talking about Bluesky again
Coz it’s objectively hilarious that it’s collapsing. Because Woke lefties are such dreadful, hectoring, intolerant and stupid people. And now we have proof
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Russia looking to invade Iran too?
Iran feels threatened by Pakistan to the east, who have nukes, and by Israel, who have nukes. They have a history of conflict with Russia, who have nukes. They were previously invaded by the UK and US, who have nukes. They were more recently invaded by Iraq, using chemical weapons. I can get why they want a strong defence.
That does not of course excuse their own aggression.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 13m I repeat: the scenario of the two main parties ending up being Reform & the Tories is underpriced.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 3m Reform vs Lib Dems is also plausible. As things stand, we don't have a strong reason to believe Labour must survive as one of the main two parties if Reform gets to be one of them.
If the latter turns out to happen then it seems Reeves single-handedly destroyed the Labour party with one budget.
Labour are now in a desperate position
They were always likely to disappoint on things like asylum, migration, culture wars, education, NHS reform, foreign policy, you name it. They obvs have no ideas, as we can see, and they are clearly quite dumb
But they had one hope. Fixing the economy. But they have not only failed to fix it, they are making it dramatically worse, with terribly self harming taxes and total fiscal confusion. The punishment of both markets and voters will be severe
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Have you any idea that amount of trouble Iran causes in the Middle East? I know Israel are seen by many as the bad guys; but Iran is, if anything, far worse. They are utterly destabilising the region.
As is Israel at the moment. Look at Syria and Lebanon.
Many of the problems in Syria and Lebanon are caused by Iran's interference in those countries over the past few decades. Iran's involvement in Lebanon is well known, and Iran was the main entity propping Assad up in Syria for a decade - including loads of Iranian troops.
Yes, I don't like what Israel is doing in those countries at the moment (or Turkey in Syria, for that matter). But if you criticise Israel for that, then you should be howling with rage at what Iran has done to those countries in very recent history. Supporting Hezbollah and Hamas alone (even if they are from differing sects of Islam) has been a massive embuggering factor in the Middle East. And then you have their support for the Houthis in Yemen.
I don't see why people (like @Roger last night) seem so keen to give Iran a free pass, whilst savaging Israel.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Not going to take lectures on “value for money” from someone who doesn’t believe in climate change and still thinks Brexit was a good idea
Pathetic response even by your standards.
True though
It's a Keir Starmer response. Clearly you're the one person in the country who enjoys watching the silly sack of lard 'answer' tricky questions at PMQs.
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Russia looking to invade Iran too?
Iran feels threatened by Pakistan to the east, who have nukes, and by Israel, who have nukes. They have a history of conflict with Russia, who have nukes. They were previously invaded by the UK and US, who have nukes. They were more recently invaded by Iraq, using chemical weapons. I can get why they want a strong defence.
That does not of course excuse their own aggression.
Yes, Iran has been the victim of other countries in the past. But many other countries have been the victims of Iranian actions for decades.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Not going to take lectures on “value for money” from someone who doesn’t believe in climate change and still thinks Brexit was a good idea
Pathetic response even by your standards.
True though
It's a Keir Starmer response. Clearly you're the one person in the country who enjoys watching the silly sack of lard 'answer' tricky questions at PMQs.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Not going to take lectures on “value for money” from someone who doesn’t believe in climate change and still thinks Brexit was a good idea
Pathetic response even by your standards.
True though
It's a Keir Starmer response. Clearly you're the one person in the country who enjoys watching the silly sack of lard 'answer' tricky questions at PMQs.
"Prayers and condolences to the devastated families of all on board Ai 171 that crashed after take off. This is the Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, whose last message was "Mayday...no thrust, losing power, unable to lift" - 32 seconds later the plans crashed."
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 13m I repeat: the scenario of the two main parties ending up being Reform & the Tories is underpriced.
Andrew Lilico @andrew_lilico · 3m Reform vs Lib Dems is also plausible. As things stand, we don't have a strong reason to believe Labour must survive as one of the main two parties if Reform gets to be one of them.
If the latter turns out to happen then it seems Reeves single-handedly destroyed the Labour party with one budget.
Labour are now in a desperate position
They were always likely to disappoint on things like asylum, migration, culture wars, education, NHS reform, foreign policy, you name it. They obvs have no ideas, as we can see, and they are clearly quite dumb
But they had one hope. Fixing the economy. But they have not only failed to fix it, they are making it dramatically worse, with terribly self harming taxes and total fiscal confusion. The punishment of both markets and voters will be severe
Watch Wales next year. They will get the full Scotland 2015 treatment. A taster of what's to come. If the London locals go very badly same day then they could be looking at a wipeout worse than Tories 24. They absolutely have to avoid dropping into recession this year to have any chance imo
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Not going to take lectures on “value for money” from someone who doesn’t believe in climate change and still thinks Brexit was a good idea
Pathetic response even by your standards.
True though
It's a Keir Starmer response. Clearly you're the one person in the country who enjoys watching the silly sack of lard 'answer' tricky questions at PMQs.
Impossible to say as I don’t watch PMQs
I've always assumed most political nerds don't watch PMQs, as they absorb enough political detail and minutiae to get no informational value from it, and any entertainment value can will be found when political blogs and accounts tweet about it.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
That's because in a spectacular feat, Starmer’s lot are actually worse than Rishi's. The Sunak Government was, as you suggest, timid and useless in the face of decline, farting on about chess and maths till 18. Starmer is worse, because he is actively heaping fuel on to the decline. £30bn to Chagos. £18bn to Milliband's green wankery. 12 years of fishing to the EU for a non-agreement on E-gates. Employers NI rise. None of those came from Sunak.
Not going to take lectures on “value for money” from someone who doesn’t believe in climate change and still thinks Brexit was a good idea
Pathetic response even by your standards.
True though
It's a Keir Starmer response. Clearly you're the one person in the country who enjoys watching the silly sack of lard 'answer' tricky questions at PMQs.
Impossible to say as I don’t watch PMQs
I've always assumed most political nerds don't watch PMQs, as they absorb enough political detail and minutiae to get no informational value from it, and any entertainment value can will be found when political blogs and accounts tweet about it.
Barely anyone watches it. If anyone did both Hague and Howard would have been 20 points clear of Blair
Doocy: “What made you change your mind about targeting in California, farmers and people in the hotels and leisure business?”
Trump: “Our farmers are being hurt badly. They have very good workers…They’re not citizens, but they’ve turned out to be great. And we’re going to have to do something about that.” https://x.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1933205206755340390
Iran want nuclear weapons so they don’t get Ukrained. Can’t say I blame them.
Russia looking to invade Iran too?
Iran feels threatened by Pakistan to the east, who have nukes, and by Israel, who have nukes. They have a history of conflict with Russia, who have nukes. They were previously invaded by the UK and US, who have nukes. They were more recently invaded by Iraq, using chemical weapons. I can get why they want a strong defence.
That does not of course excuse their own aggression.
So the moral of the story is we should take them out now, before they get nukes.
My view, with a couple of cans of Guinness, at 5.30pm today, atop Malham Cove. Absolutely perfect evening.
Now moved on to the Buck, in Malham, presumably to the relief of the young couple up there hoping, I assume, for the opportunity for al fresco copulation. Ah, to be 20 again.
State dept have cancelled a press conference amidst the tension in the ME. Eyes on Iran!
Yawn. 🌮
Probably and hopefully. But he might just fancy some dramatic good-for-ratings military action against a soft target. Neither Israel nor his Gulf mates would object.
You missed the word "not" after the word hopefully.
If we want anyone to take out the Mullahs its going to have to be the Israelis unfortunately.
TACO Trump won't do it.
Ah, rooting for some more unprovoked military action in that bastion of stability, the Middle East, are we?
Well as I say I think there's a decent chance, TACO notwithstanding, that you'll get it. 30% let's say.
Unprovoked.
Unprovoked?
Unprovoked!?
LOL kinabalu that was a good one, you literally made me laugh out loud at that one.
Iran has bombed the US?
Sorry, missed that. My bad.
Iran has sent countless weapons and terrorists against the west, especially Israel, yes.
Doocy: “What made you change your mind about targeting in California, farmers and people in the hotels and leisure business?”
Trump: “Our farmers are being hurt badly. They have very good workers…They’re not citizens, but they’ve turned out to be great. And we’re going to have to do something about that.” https://x.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1933205206755340390
Reform now definitely off their post LE highs and some sign of a minor Lab recovery in the works. Tories at 16 with FoN for 5 weeks
6 pts down from the top dog party at this point in a parliament is OK for the gov't tbh. It's looking terminal for the Tories though. Annihilation awaits at the next GE if this carries on with Farage either PM or LOTO.
The value bet would be Ed Davey as LOTO
Id want to see them actually adding substantially to their 2024 polling before that would be remotely attractive. They are almost non existent in the Midlands, North and Wales, so I can't see the path to opposition as it stands
If I squint, I can see how the Lib Dems get to 90 seats: hold what they have, get some inner city strongholds back (Cambridge, Bermondsey, Haringey, Cardiff Central) take the seats where they are close behind the Tories even if third ( Romsey, North Dorset, Hamble Valley, N Cotswolds, Hinckley etc)
But I then look at how they get to 100, or 110, or 120, and I can't even imagine what the seats they'd need to win would be. Maybe look for a by-election to win and hold somewhere unexpected? If the Lib Dems can't break into areas they've had little strength in since ever, they aren't ever going to get to 100 seats. And I don't see anything in polling or local results that suggests that sort of breakthrough.
So you'd need a complete landslide for Labour or Reform, to get the Lib Dems coming second. And that just doesn't ring true for the moment, with polarised and split voting all around.
And they've got to hold on to the extremely efficient voting that got them 72 seats last time. I can see them losing a dozen seats even at 15% nationally. Unless Labour completely collapse they just won't have the 'numbers', and if it becomes a Reform Labour scrap or a tight Lab Con fight they will get squeezed
This is the argument I've had with several Lib Demmers who proudly boast 'but, 72 MPs', and compare it with Reform's 5 off more votes. Leaving aside the principle of PR, I agree that if you're looking to maximise representation for a party in the mid-teens then the 2024 strategy worked fine (though still relies on tactical voting, which came a bit unstuck in the past in 2010, never mind 2015).
But it also puts the sweet spot at about 72 MPs. The vote spread becomes increasingly inefficient thereafter as you go up, whereas although Reform hit breakthrough at a higher level, once they're there, the seats come flooding in. So the question is: what's the limit of your ambition. Do you see your ceiling as a largish third party or do you aspire to lead a government?
On the other hand, the Lib Dems are being quite distinct from all the other three parties at the moment. unfortunately, they're not getting as much media coverage as they should be - particularly with something to say that the others aren't, whether on social care or Trump, Europe and foreign affairs. The comms team needs to be knocking harder on media doors.
The LDs won pretty much all their target seats, that will be very hard to replicate. I'm sure they are trying as ever to get attention, but political commentators and the news just doesn't find them interesting enough I think.
@BartholomewRoberts the US wont strike Iran they will get Israel to do their dirty work so Trump can pretend he isn’t starting a new war in the middle east
And because TACO Trump is too chickenshit to do it himself.
Hopefully Israel are not.
Will noone rid us of these turbulent Mullahs?
And more Israelis and Iranians will die
People are dying either way.
Iran are the root of most of the evil in the Middle East. There will never be a peaceful Middle East as long as they're there.
The choice when faced by evil is to confront it, or do nothing.
All it takes for evil to triumph is good to do nothing.
TACO Trump is no longer on the side of good though.
What proportion of 'the evil' are Saudi Arabia responsible for?
And what percentage the USA, and what percentage the UK?
I hope we stay out of this one. Is there a Mid East intervention that's worked out to our credit in the last 100 years?
Saddam is gone. Gaddafi is gone.
Just a shame we didn't get rid of the Mullahs at the same time as Saddam.
Bush was right to recognise N Korea, Iran and Iraq as an axis of evil, and N Korea have nukes so they're untouchable as per @rcs1000 distasteful analogy. Russia is firmly in the axis now, but also has nukes.
Taking out Iraq but not Iran was rather pointless. Like removing one malignant tumour but leaving another right next to it.
As well as being evil, Iran unquestioningly is seeking WMDs too.
He's everything id expect from a haunted house presenting Reform Chairman
He elicits the same vibes as the many former Fox News presenters now filling Trump's cabinet.
Right wing politics desperately needs some serious and competent people.
Right now the Country needs serious and competent people unlike Starmer snd Reeves
Indeed I cannot see any politician that could deal with the hard decisions needed
Starmer and Reeves are serious politicians who are at least trying to do the best job they can. You just don’t like them.
They are light years more serious than Kemi and Farage
Because you don't like Kemi and Farage. It's a circular argument.
Not really. Farage is objectively promising a platform that isn’t deliverable. It’s Brexit all over again
Kemi is just talking to herself
This is opinion, not fact. They are all pretty useless in my opinion, but that's not objective, its opinion There is nothing objectively more 'serious' about Starmer than the LOTO
There is. Objectively. Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable. Kemi is talking to herself and nobody is listening
'Starmer is Prime Minister is delivering a programme that is at least stable'
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
You forgot the best part of their "stability", spending billions we don't have reversing the one sensible change they'd made.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
It’s still stable. It’s just managed decline the same way all British governments have acted my entire adult life. @Big_G_NorthWales cheered on Cameron and Boris and May and Truss (until he didn’t) who continued to pile the debt on via triple lock and other spending. Suddenly Labour are in Government and it’s suddenly the worst thing in the world.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
IMHO Labour may not be wonderful but they're far & away the best option at the moment.
Comments
Scoop: The Department of Homeland Security on Thursday will tell hundreds of thousands of migrants that their permission to live and work in the United States had been revoked and they should leave the country, according to a copy of the notice.
https://x.com/priscialva/status/1933207648435843575
Iran are the root of most of the evil in the Middle East. There will never be a peaceful Middle East as long as they're there.
The choice when faced by evil is to confront it, or do nothing.
All it takes for evil to triumph is good to do nothing.
TACO Trump is no longer on the side of good though.
Otherwise, they are limited by UNS in not being competitive, on a straight swing basis, in that many seats.
But far too many commentators are clinging to UNS as if we’re still in Bob Mackenzie’s 1960-70s GEs, whereas the truth is that UNS, despite being easy to use and calculate, really doesn’t work any more (cf. the PB’er consensus on LD seats the last time around).
The most favourable scenario for the LibDems is if scores of former Labour voters become disillusioned and are looking for some other non-right wing party to vote for.
And who says the programme is 'stable'? You? 0.7 growth to 0.3 contraction in 2 months isnt stable, quarter of a million fewer jobs isnt stable, u turns aren't stable, inflation rising well above target isn't stable.
Its a matter of opinion, and perspective
Spöttle seems to be in the news.
That they're supposedly our allies makes me feel sick, but it makes a sick sense like allying with Stalin in the war in an "enemy of my enemy" sense. No more than that.
At least they're not directly funding and weaponising terrorism and groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, though they encourage it with Wahhabism.
https://x.com/elizaorlins/status/1933209452611510366
Under Starmer the labour party is at an all time low for trustworthy
Trustworthy 14% (-1)
Untrustworthy 59% (-)
You gov 8-9th June
Still they still have their fanbase though much diminshed
Do they not know, or not care? Those heartless monsters.
Borrowing through the roof, high taxes, anti business budget, increasing unemployment and today 0-3% growth
https://news.sky.com/story/trump-tariffs-a-big-factor-but-latest-uk-economy-performance-makes-for-unpleasant-reading-13382463
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=N&CON=16&LAB=24&LIB=13&Reform=30&Green=11&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTReform=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2024base
Look at Syria and Lebanon.
And doing so by claiming they'd "fixed the foundations" of the economy so could now afford to reverse last years decision.
In the week its revealed employment numbers have fallen by quarter of a million thanks to Reeves tax changes, and we have gone into negative growth.
With stability like this, who needs chaos?
And in any event, he made far more consequential missteps where Brexit is concerned.
I hope we stay out of this one. Is there a Mid East intervention that's worked out to our credit in the last 100 years?
That should be our side, not destabilising.
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott deployed over 5,000 National Guard soldiers across the state "to maintain law and order."
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/la-protests-ice-raids-trump-06-12-25#cmbtecpii000r356p473g5b9k
Reform 30%
Con 20%
Lab 20%
LibDem 20%
Then, I could easily see the LibDems in the official opposition spot, because they have the enormous benefit of getting bugger all share in half the country. The LibDems could easily lose their deposits in 300 seats, and that means their 20% national share goes a long way in the other half of the country.
Don't forget, too, that in this scenario the Labour Party would have lost 40% of their vote, and the Conservatives another fifth.
Reform - even if their vote share was relatively inefficient - would likely get a small majority, and I think it's far from impossible the LibDems would be second with 100-140 seats.
I am pretty disappointed by the Labour government but the amount of hysteria and hyperbole on here is something to behold.
It would be about bloody time for Israel to hit back at the source of the conflict.
If we get unemployment then cutting migration won't fix that either. Same fallacy.
🚨 🍸Just how bad are the Tories woes? This bad: In our new poll of favourite Summer Tipples they have *lost* their lead with Pimms drinkers. Meanwhile Reform’s biggest lead is among cider chuggers, Labour with Frozen Marg fans & Tories now only lead with Aperol Spritz quaffers
https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3lrgcaisqrs2l
“Mark Cuban says left-leaning Bluesky’s ‘lack of diversity of thought’ driving users back to Elon Musk’s X trib.al/gNWHQch”
https://x.com/nypost/status/1933166598140854378?s=61&t=GGp3Vs1t1kTWDiyA-odnZg
Who could have guessed? Who could have guessed that a bunch of shrill wanky lefties putting themselves in a hideous Woke silo would end up with them all shouting at each other, like a smelly, grotesque cabal of banshees, then slowly, guiltily, slinking back to X?
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
13m
I repeat: the scenario of the two main parties ending up being Reform & the Tories is underpriced.
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
3m
Reform vs Lib Dems is also plausible. As things stand, we don't have a strong reason to believe Labour must survive as one of the main two parties if Reform gets to be one of them.
https://x.com/andrew_lilico/status/1933220802649903190
If the latter turns out to happen then it seems Reeves single-handedly destroyed the Labour party with one budget.
That's Labour's strong reason.
Public sector payroll vote.
Indeed here's a brilliant example:
https://bsky.app/profile/keptsimple.bsky.social/post/3lrgbol3fr22g
I hoped Starmer's pledge for honesty and integrity would manifest itself once in government but he has failed to live upto those expectations and as for Reeves words fail me much like they did in Truss's 6 weeks
And yes, Labour are in government and nearly one year on with a litany of bad decisions they have only themselves to blame
We are a long way off an election though and rere is much to be played out before then.
Its just a bigger boy sits atop, too
That does not of course excuse their own aggression.
They were always likely to disappoint on things like asylum, migration, culture wars, education, NHS reform, foreign policy, you name it. They obvs have no ideas, as we can see, and they are clearly quite dumb
But they had one hope. Fixing the economy. But they have not only failed to fix it, they are making it dramatically worse, with terribly self harming taxes and total fiscal confusion. The punishment of both markets and voters will be severe
Yes, I don't like what Israel is doing in those countries at the moment (or Turkey in Syria, for that matter). But if you criticise Israel for that, then you should be howling with rage at what Iran has done to those countries in very recent history. Supporting Hezbollah and Hamas alone (even if they are from differing sects of Islam) has been a massive embuggering factor in the Middle East. And then you have their support for the Houthis in Yemen.
I don't see why people (like @Roger last night) seem so keen to give Iran a free pass, whilst savaging Israel.
"Prayers and condolences to the devastated families of all on board Ai 171 that crashed after take off. This is the Captain Sumeet Sabharwal, whose last message was "Mayday...no thrust, losing power, unable to lift" - 32 seconds later the plans crashed."
https://x.com/BDUTT/status/1933210804544782768
They absolutely have to avoid dropping into recession this year to have any chance imo
Doocy: “What made you change your mind about targeting in California, farmers and people in the hotels and leisure business?”
Trump: “Our farmers are being hurt badly. They have very good workers…They’re not citizens, but they’ve turned out to be great. And we’re going to have to do something about that.”
https://x.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1933205206755340390
If its not already too late.
Now moved on to the Buck, in Malham, presumably to the relief of the young couple up there hoping, I assume, for the opportunity for al fresco copulation. Ah, to be 20 again.
Yes its your bad if you'd missed that.
Just a shame we didn't get rid of the Mullahs at the same time as Saddam.
Bush was right to recognise N Korea, Iran and Iraq as an axis of evil, and N Korea have nukes so they're untouchable as per @rcs1000 distasteful analogy. Russia is firmly in the axis now, but also has nukes.
Taking out Iraq but not Iran was rather pointless. Like removing one malignant tumour but leaving another right next to it.
As well as being evil, Iran unquestioningly is seeking WMDs too.