Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB’s leadership rules will limit the number of nominees and c

123468

Comments

  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 6,621
    Cookie said:

    I honestly think the talent in the Labour Party is really very poor at the moment, I can't think of anyone good.

    Cooper was terrible in the last leadership contest, maybe she'll make a better go of it this time, who knows.

    Starmer is by far the best - but even he is nowhere near what they had in the 90s and early 2000s.

    Depressing.

    I'll say this for Yvette Cooper: she isn't a blithering idiot. Her problem last time around was mainly presentational. She's not exactly one to get the blood stirring. But maybe the country and/or Labour Party will have had rather too much of politicians who stir the blood next time around.
    Her problem last time is she didn't want the job. She went on holiday during the hustings.

    Let's be clear. If you want to lead the Labour Party at the moment, you will need the stomach for a brutal fight.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,722
    edited December 2019
    Stocky said:

    Cookie said:

    On the subject of Dawn Butler, has her interview on LBC been mentioned here?
    Apparently 65pc of the country’s rough sleepers live in Brent.
    And these 3,000 people seemingly need 8,000 houses

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCwFLUt6zgE

    Many of the left's hopes of the next generation seem to make Jeremy Corbyn look like Albert Einstein.

    On the subject of Grimsby, meanwhile, the town is turning a corner. Offshore wind is turning Grimsby into the next Aberdeen.
    The retail heart of the town is still depressing, mind, but that is true of 80% of towns in the country. The death of retail need is a separate issue entirely.


    Did he ask her how her tax payer funded Jacuzzi-style bath is ?
    Honestly, it will be manna from heaven for Tories if Butler, Long-Bailey, Burgon or Pidcock were to become Lab leader.
    If Yvette Cooper were Labour leader I’d vote for Labour in a heartbeat.

    If any of those four become party leader I would have to give serious consideration to voting Tory even if they were led by Michael Gove.
  • camel said:

    Cookie said:

    Can we please not attack each other for holding different views, I don't want this to turn into one of those websites.

    Challenge the views and argue them of course but just having posts about "muh Tories" or "muh Labour" really doesn't add much

    Horse, your polite partisanship does the site credit.
    Horse's main attribute is enthusiasm. Horse is also unfailingly willing to fess up and apologise when wrong.
    I still won't be voting Tory :)
  • Cookie said:

    melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Well, not really. Tot up the posts as you go through and it's not far from the balance of the UK as a whole, if we take the polls as roughly valid. Maybe a few more LDs than the country as a whole, but that shouldn't surprise us given that OGH is a Lib Dem, and if the site is demographically skewed in any way it is probably a lot more middle class than average.

    This isn't meant rudely, but new left-wing posters have come on here before and been quite taken aback at how pro-Tory it is, because it doesn't chime with their experience in which pretty much everyone is left wing.
    I'm definitely not a Tory!

    My experience of being involved in politics over the last few decades, and being involved in Indyref campaigning, showed me the dangers of the echo chamber.

    This forum is full of very knowledgeable people, with a wide variety of fascinating life experiences. And SeanT.

    Just speaking to people who love Jezza is going to leave the same kind of hangover on Dec 13th that I had on September 19th 2014.

    Sure, there are Pidcock rampers, AV lovers and people who don't think pineapple belongs on a pizza, but that just adds to the charm of the place. In 10+ years of hanging around these parts, I've made enough money from great tips on here to know that you will find accurate information, if you read carefully enough.
  • ydoethur said:

    Stocky said:

    Cookie said:

    On the subject of Dawn Butler, has her interview on LBC been mentioned here?
    Apparently 65pc of the country’s rough sleepers live in Brent.
    And these 3,000 people seemingly need 8,000 houses

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCwFLUt6zgE

    Many of the left's hopes of the next generation seem to make Jeremy Corbyn look like Albert Einstein.

    On the subject of Grimsby, meanwhile, the town is turning a corner. Offshore wind is turning Grimsby into the next Aberdeen.
    The retail heart of the town is still depressing, mind, but that is true of 80% of towns in the country. The death of retail need is a separate issue entirely.


    Did he ask her how her tax payer funded Jacuzzi-style bath is ?
    Honestly, it will be manna from heaven for Tories if Butler, Long-Bailey, Burgon or Pidcock were to become Lab leader.
    If Yvette Cooper were Labour leader I’d vote for Labour in a heartbeat.

    If any of those four become party leader I would have to give serious consideration to voting Tory even if they were led by Michael Gove.
    If Cooper was leader and stood on this Labour manifesto (she won't - but stick with me), would you still vote for Labour?

    For me it's far more about the policies than the people - but I do agree a decent leader is very important in delivering those.
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,357

    Ignoring for the moment the fact that it s US data, some of this might be down to increasing longevity and the later dates at which children inherit. Many of those baby boomers are still around, but their parents probably died at an earlier age than they did.
    Their parents also had vastly less wealth.

    The rapid accumulation of wealth by the oldest in society is a recent phenomena that tracks the baby boomers aging exactly.

    It is not some universal iron law, it is a result of shaping society around funneling wealth to the boomers and then ensuring they retain it in old age when it times past the old would have been spending it in their own care.
  • Am I also right in saying that YouGov will update the MRP several times between now and they release it? Are they updating it once a day?

    At GE2017 they released daily updates to the public. Obviously they're gathering data for it every day, and so could calculate daily updates, but I believe the next the public willl see of the MRP is as a dress rehearsal for the exit poll, at 10pm on the 11th.
    Ah, no, @AndyJS is right, the day before on the Tuesday.
  • Am I also right in saying that YouGov will update the MRP several times between now and they release it? Are they updating it once a day?

    At GE2017 they released daily updates to the public. Obviously they're gathering data for it every day, and so could calculate daily updates, but I believe the next the public willl see of the MRP is as a dress rehearsal for the exit poll, at 10pm on the 11th.
    That’s quite a ballsy call. Tricky to hide behind “late swing” so they are looking to make a reputation from getting 17 and 19 right.
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.

    Next you will be telling us that Blair who you voted for was not a liar.
  • BluerBlueBluerBlue Posts: 521
    edited December 2019

    melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.
    Show me a politician you think isn't a liar ... and I'll show you a really outstanding liar :wink:
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,982
    As another day moves along with no negative headlines for the Conservatives, that 1.38 for the Con Maj or Betfair looks more attractive. Serious money going on that market too, around a million in the past two days.
    It even dipped briefly to 1.37 earlier!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,722

    ydoethur said:

    Stocky said:

    Cookie said:

    On the subject of Dawn Butler, has her interview on LBC been mentioned here?
    Apparently 65pc of the country’s rough sleepers live in Brent.
    And these 3,000 people seemingly need 8,000 houses

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCwFLUt6zgE

    Many of the left's hopes of the next generation seem to make Jeremy Corbyn look like Albert Einstein.

    On the subject of Grimsby, meanwhile, the town is turning a corner. Offshore wind is turning Grimsby into the next Aberdeen.
    The retail heart of the town is still depressing, mind, but that is true of 80% of towns in the country. The death of retail need is a separate issue entirely.


    Did he ask her how her tax payer funded Jacuzzi-style bath is ?
    Honestly, it will be manna from heaven for Tories if Butler, Long-Bailey, Burgon or Pidcock were to become Lab leader.
    If Yvette Cooper were Labour leader I’d vote for Labour in a heartbeat.

    If any of those four become party leader I would have to give serious consideration to voting Tory even if they were led by Michael Gove.
    If Cooper was leader and stood on this Labour manifesto (she won't - but stick with me), would you still vote for Labour?

    For me it's far more about the policies than the people - but I do agree a decent leader is very important in delivering those.
    No. But the point is, she would not stand on these policies. The Labour manifesto is a function of the ideological zealotry of the current leadership, mingled with a highly unhealthy dose of populism and a complete lack of awareness of economics. Cooper has a great many faults, but she is far too intelligent and experienced to swallow this mix. A Labour Party led by her would be offering something much closer to the manifesto of the Liberal Democrats (whom I would vote for if the bastards were standing).

    Incidentally, the reason I dislike Corbyn is partly because I don’t think he’s a good human being, but mostly because of his policy offering which I firmly believe would lead to economic ruination.
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.

    But not in the same league as Blair's lies that resulted in 500,000 dead & injured in Iraq.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 23,023
    ydoethur said:

    kjohnw1 said:
    That video is quite extraordinary.

    Who would ever have thought Jeremy Clarkson would be a remainer?
    That's not a surprise at all. He's very pro-European (rather than pro-EU) and he really dislikes the USA.
  • BluerBlue said:

    melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.
    Show me a politician you think isn't a liar ... and I'll show you a really oustanding liar :wink:
    I've had this before on here, and it is depressingly facile, lazy, and illogical. If they were all equally dishonest, there would be no point in the kind of discourse we all enjoy here daily.

    You want a name? Ken Clarke. Has he ever lied? Probably. Is he fundamentally honest? Yes, definitely.

    Johnson? You're aving a larf! :)
  • CookieCookie Posts: 6,371
    ydoethur said:

    Cookie said:

    melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Well, not really. Tot up the posts as you go through and it's not far from the balance of the UK as a whole, if we take the polls as roughly valid. Maybe a few more LDs than the country as a whole, but that shouldn't surprise us given that OGH is a Lib Dem, and if the site is demographically skewed in any way it is probably a lot more middle class than average.

    This isn't meant rudely, but new left-wing posters have come on here before and been quite taken aback at how pro-Tory it is, because it doesn't chime with their experience in which pretty much everyone is left wing.
    This one’s an obvious troll. Advise not feeding.

    Speaking of trolls, I wonder what JWisemann is doing these days.
    Ha ha - personally, I miss Martin Day. Who on reflection probably wasn't a troll, just preternaturally overenthusiastic.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,297
    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
  • Interesting nugget about the postal votes looking bleak for Labour in Labour held seats.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    David Merritt says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me.

    Do you mean, CHB, that you were considering voting Tory before this?

    Because if so, you hid it incredibly well...
    No, it just justifies my already made decision more :)
    Well, fair play.

    I have no idea who David Merritt is, but that’s your choice.

    In my last rounds of voting I voted as follows:

    Green
    Liberal Democrat
    Conservative
    Labour
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative
    Liberal Democrat
    Plaid Cymru
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative

    So I flatter myself I am a swing voter.

    For the first time in the 18 years I have had the vote, including parish council by elections, I will be spoiling my ballot paper at this election.
    He is the father of one of the people murdered during the terrorist attack. He's attacked the Government response to it at length. If he says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me. A decent man and a tragically lost son being on my side makes me feel better about my decision.
    Not worried about the politicisation of a terrorist attack anymore then?
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.

    But not in the same league as Blair's lies that resulted in 500,000 dead & injured in Iraq.
    You win today's Whataboutery Award.

    Yes, somewhere in the world there's a bigger liar than Johnson, so everything's ok.
  • saddened said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    David Merritt says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me.

    Do you mean, CHB, that you were considering voting Tory before this?

    Because if so, you hid it incredibly well...
    No, it just justifies my already made decision more :)
    Well, fair play.

    I have no idea who David Merritt is, but that’s your choice.

    In my last rounds of voting I voted as follows:

    Green
    Liberal Democrat
    Conservative
    Labour
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative
    Liberal Democrat
    Plaid Cymru
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative

    So I flatter myself I am a swing voter.

    For the first time in the 18 years I have had the vote, including parish council by elections, I will be spoiling my ballot paper at this election.
    He is the father of one of the people murdered during the terrorist attack. He's attacked the Government response to it at length. If he says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me. A decent man and a tragically lost son being on my side makes me feel better about my decision.
    Not worried about the politicisation of a terrorist attack anymore then?
    If the man of somebody who was murdered wishes to make these points, I have no right to argue with him. I'm not politicising anything really, I'm just saying that having somebody decent on my side makes me feel better about my position.

    Not trying to convince anyone else - and definitely not trying to politicise the attack.
  • camelcamel Posts: 815

    camel said:

    Cookie said:

    Can we please not attack each other for holding different views, I don't want this to turn into one of those websites.

    Challenge the views and argue them of course but just having posts about "muh Tories" or "muh Labour" really doesn't add much

    Horse, your polite partisanship does the site credit.
    Horse's main attribute is enthusiasm. Horse is also unfailingly willing to fess up and apologise when wrong.
    I still won't be voting Tory :)
    I should jolly well hope not.
  • JamesPJamesP Posts: 85
    Sandpit said:

    As another day moves along with no negative headlines for the Conservatives, that 1.38 for the Con Maj or Betfair looks more attractive. Serious money going on that market too, around a million in the past two days.
    It even dipped briefly to 1.37 earlier!

    It's back to 1.37.

    But I have a PB 'bad feeling' about the polls tonight, wouldn't be surprised to see the price to have drifted in 12 hours time.
  • Interesting nugget about the postal votes looking bleak for Labour in Labour held seats.
    I'd caution reading too much into these things, because low voting doesn't necessarily mean as much as we think it does. It might mean a lot of voters are undecided and haven't returned their votes yet for example. It may also mean they're not bothering to vote and just sitting on their hands.

    I highly doubt they'd know the breakdown of the votes - that would be incredibly illegal - so they're presumably going on return figures, which could really be bad for either side depending on the seat.

    I suspect it's bad for Labour though - at the moment.
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.

    But not in the same league as Blair's lies that resulted in 500,000 dead & injured in Iraq.
    You win today's Whataboutery Award.

    Yes, somewhere in the world there's a bigger liar than Johnson, so everything's ok.
    You lose by pretending that Johnson is the only politician that lies,naive to say the least.
  • Jess Philips for leader? Please God no
  • I think Blair is pretty unpopular now, at least partially as a result of his lies over Iraq. That unpopularity should have happened earlier - though it's there in the 2005 Ipsos-MORI leadership ratings (my view is that Brown won that election).

    Perhaps we should try and hold leaders to account for their lies earlier?
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.

    But not in the same league as Blair's lies that resulted in 500,000 dead & injured in Iraq.
    You win today's Whataboutery Award.

    Yes, somewhere in the world there's a bigger liar than Johnson, so everything's ok.
    What is it you think he’s lied about so egregiously? The bus? That wasn’t lies, it was just political messaging. “Do or die”? The same.

    Maybe the reason I don’t feel lied to is that I haven’t felt misled. On those occasions, and so many others, it seemed to me that the line was delivered with a knowing wink and there was no real deception.

    Interesting that perceptions vary so wildly though, because I do understand that many genuinely think he’s a liar.
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.

    But not in the same league as Blair's lies that resulted in 500,000 dead & injured in Iraq.
    You win today's Whataboutery Award.

    Yes, somewhere in the world there's a bigger liar than Johnson, so everything's ok.
    What is it you think he’s lied about so egregiously? The bus? That wasn’t lies, it was just political messaging. “Do or die”? The same.

    Maybe the reason I don’t feel lied to is that I haven’t felt misled. On those occasions, and so many others, it seemed to me that the line was delivered with a knowing wink and there was no real deception.

    Interesting that perceptions vary so wildly though, because I do understand that many genuinely think he’s a liar.
    £350m wasn't a lie, oh dear God.

    Do we send £350m a week to the EU? No. That's a lie.
  • camelcamel Posts: 815
    Great header article by David Herdson. It seems it is spectacularly difficult to become Labour leader.
    Surely the next leader has to be leftish and female, but on what I have learned from the article, I'm thinking my small investment in Laura Pidcock is looking unlikely to come to fruition. In fact, it looks like a shoo in for RLB.

    Still I think Pidders is the one with the x factor.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 10,470
    edited December 2019

    I think Blair is pretty unpopular now, at least partially as a result of his lies over Iraq. That unpopularity should have happened earlier - though it's there in the 2005 Ipsos-MORI leadership ratings (my view is that Brown won that election).

    Perhaps we should try and hold leaders to account for their lies earlier?

    It would certainly help if we didn't vote for Leaders who were demostrably known liars even before they took high office.
  • Jess Philips for leader? Please God no

    Agree,a very loud airhead.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,297
    Cookie said:

    ydoethur said:

    Cookie said:

    melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Well, not really. Tot up the posts as you go through and it's not far from the balance of the UK as a whole, if we take the polls as roughly valid. Maybe a few more LDs than the country as a whole, but that shouldn't surprise us given that OGH is a Lib Dem, and if the site is demographically skewed in any way it is probably a lot more middle class than average.

    This isn't meant rudely, but new left-wing posters have come on here before and been quite taken aback at how pro-Tory it is, because it doesn't chime with their experience in which pretty much everyone is left wing.
    This one’s an obvious troll. Advise not feeding.

    Speaking of trolls, I wonder what JWisemann is doing these days.
    Ha ha - personally, I miss Martin Day. Who on reflection probably wasn't a troll, just preternaturally overenthusiastic.
    Martin Day was prematurely Nostrodamus!

    If only he had still been here for the 2015 LibDem results.....
  • camel said:

    Great header article by David Herdson. It seems it is spectacularly difficult to become Labour leader.
    Surely the next leader has to be leftish and female, but on what I have learned from the article, I'm thinking my small investment in Laura Pidcock is looking unlikely to come to fruition. In fact, it looks like a shoo in for RLB.

    Still I think Pidders is the one with the x factor.

    Still think Starmer has a decent chance, perhaps he might make it to Chancellor at the least.

    They need to have a candidate to bridge the party in at least some respect. The problem is that any policies that are vaguely similar to Corbyn's - supported by the membership - will probably not be supported by the PLP.
  • saddened said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    David Merritt says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me.

    Do you mean, CHB, that you were considering voting Tory before this?

    Because if so, you hid it incredibly well...
    No, it just justifies my already made decision more :)
    Well, fair play.

    I have no idea who David Merritt is, but that’s your choice.

    In my last rounds of voting I voted as follows:

    Green
    Liberal Democrat
    Conservative
    Labour
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative
    Liberal Democrat
    Plaid Cymru
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative

    So I flatter myself I am a swing voter.

    For the first time in the 18 years I have had the vote, including parish council by elections, I will be spoiling my ballot paper at this election.
    He is the father of one of the people murdered during the terrorist attack. He's attacked the Government response to it at length. If he says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me. A decent man and a tragically lost son being on my side makes me feel better about my decision.
    Not worried about the politicisation of a terrorist attack anymore then?
    If the man of somebody who was murdered wishes to make these points, I have no right to argue with him. I'm not politicising anything really, I'm just saying that having somebody decent on my side makes me feel better about my position.

    Not trying to convince anyone else - and definitely not trying to politicise the attack.
    You literally just said that David Merritt's opinion bolsters your political voting choice for the Labour Party...
  • Jess Philips for leader? Please God no

    Agree,a very loud airhead.
    She has contributed precisely nothing in the last three years. Nothing.
  • BluerBlue said:

    saddened said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    David Merritt says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me.

    Do you mean, CHB, that you were considering voting Tory before this?

    Because if so, you hid it incredibly well...
    No, it just justifies my already made decision more :)
    Well, fair play.

    I have no idea who David Merritt is, but that’s your choice.

    In my last rounds of voting I voted as follows:

    Green
    Liberal Democrat
    Conservative
    Labour
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative
    Liberal Democrat
    Plaid Cymru
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative

    So I flatter myself I am a swing voter.

    For the first time in the 18 years I have had the vote, including parish council by elections, I will be spoiling my ballot paper at this election.
    He is the father of one of the people murdered during the terrorist attack. He's attacked the Government response to it at length. If he says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me. A decent man and a tragically lost son being on my side makes me feel better about my decision.
    Not worried about the politicisation of a terrorist attack anymore then?
    If the man of somebody who was murdered wishes to make these points, I have no right to argue with him. I'm not politicising anything really, I'm just saying that having somebody decent on my side makes me feel better about my position.

    Not trying to convince anyone else - and definitely not trying to politicise the attack.
    You literally just said that David Merritt's opinion bolsters your political voting choice for the Labour Party...
    I'm voting Lib Dem, not Labour. Read my post again.

    I said for me, having his support makes my decision easier. It was not intended to swing anyone else, so I wasn't politicising the attack to get anything. I was just discussing what I was doing.

    Sorry that you've misinterpreted what I said.
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.

    But not in the same league as Blair's lies that resulted in 500,000 dead & injured in Iraq.
    You win today's Whataboutery Award.

    Yes, somewhere in the world there's a bigger liar than Johnson, so everything's ok.
    What is it you think he’s lied about so egregiously? The bus? That wasn’t lies, it was just political messaging. “Do or die”? The same.

    Maybe the reason I don’t feel lied to is that I haven’t felt misled. On those occasions, and so many others, it seemed to me that the line was delivered with a knowing wink and there was no real deception.

    Interesting that perceptions vary so wildly though, because I do understand that many genuinely think he’s a liar.
    £350m wasn't a lie, oh dear God.

    Do we send £350m a week to the EU? No. That's a lie.
    To be honest I thought at the time it wasn't important because you'd have had to be pretty damn stupid to believe it. Apparently quite a few were taken in however, but there you go. We get the politicians we deserve.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,354

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.

    But not in the same league as Blair's lies that resulted in 500,000 dead & injured in Iraq.
    You win today's Whataboutery Award.

    Yes, somewhere in the world there's a bigger liar than Johnson, so everything's ok.
    What is it you think he’s lied about so egregiously? The bus? That wasn’t lies, it was just political messaging. “Do or die”? The same.

    Maybe the reason I don’t feel lied to is that I haven’t felt misled. On those occasions, and so many others, it seemed to me that the line was delivered with a knowing wink and there was no real deception.

    Interesting that perceptions vary so wildly though, because I do understand that many genuinely think he’s a liar.
    £350m wasn't a lie, oh dear God.

    Do we send £350m a week to the EU? No. That's a lie.
    To be honest I thought at the time it wasn't important because you'd have had to be pretty damn stupid to believe it. Apparently quite a few were taken in however, but there you go. We get the politicians we deserve.
    Nothing in the last three years has convinced me that I was wrong to vote to Remain and I stand by that decision.

    On the stupid question...

    "The greatest argument against democracy is a conversation with your average voter."
  • camel said:

    Great header article by David Herdson. It seems it is spectacularly difficult to become Labour leader.
    Surely the next leader has to be leftish and female, but on what I have learned from the article, I'm thinking my small investment in Laura Pidcock is looking unlikely to come to fruition. In fact, it looks like a shoo in for RLB.

    Still I think Pidders is the one with the x factor.

    Still think Starmer has a decent chance, perhaps he might make it to Chancellor at the least.

    They need to have a candidate to bridge the party in at least some respect. The problem is that any policies that are vaguely similar to Corbyn's - supported by the membership - will probably not be supported by the PLP.
    What Labour desperately need is a method for the PLP to get rid of a leader.

    Corbyn might be PM next week, although it looks like that would be with the support of other parties. Cooper or Miliband or even Brown would be heading for a majority in their own right with Boris as an opponent.
  • geoffw said:

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

    When all the other votes are counted.

    They'd only know about return figures.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245

    saddened said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    David Merritt says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me.

    Do you mean, CHB, that you were considering voting Tory before this?

    Because if so, you hid it incredibly well...
    No, it just justifies my already made decision more :)
    Well, fair play.

    I have no idea who David Merritt is, but that’s your choice.

    In my last rounds of voting I voted as follows:

    Green
    Liberal Democrat
    Conservative
    Labour
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative
    Liberal Democrat
    Plaid Cymru
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative

    So I flatter myself I am a swing voter.

    For the first time in the 18 years I have had the vote, including parish council by elections, I will be spoiling my ballot paper at this election.
    He is the father of one of the people murdered during the terrorist attack. He's attacked the Government response to it at length. If he says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me. A decent man and a tragically lost son being on my side makes me feel better about my decision.
    Not worried about the politicisation of a terrorist attack anymore then?
    If the man of somebody who was murdered wishes to make these points, I have no right to argue with him. I'm not politicising anything really, I'm just saying that having somebody decent on my side makes me feel better about my position.

    Not trying to convince anyone else - and definitely not trying to politicise the attack.
    I didn't say you were. I'm saying he is. Also that you were anti it, when you felt it may help the Tories, on Law and Order.
  • camel said:

    Great header article by David Herdson. It seems it is spectacularly difficult to become Labour leader.
    Surely the next leader has to be leftish and female, but on what I have learned from the article, I'm thinking my small investment in Laura Pidcock is looking unlikely to come to fruition. In fact, it looks like a shoo in for RLB.

    Still I think Pidders is the one with the x factor.

    Still think Starmer has a decent chance, perhaps he might make it to Chancellor at the least.

    They need to have a candidate to bridge the party in at least some respect. The problem is that any policies that are vaguely similar to Corbyn's - supported by the membership - will probably not be supported by the PLP.
    What Labour desperately need is a method for the PLP to get rid of a leader.

    Corbyn might be PM next week, although it looks like that would be with the support of other parties. Cooper or Miliband or even Brown would be heading for a majority in their own right with Boris as an opponent.
    The PLP do have a method, it's a VONC that they used last time. It's just that the membership disagreed with them.

    The best solution is surely a candidate that pleases both sides, which to me seems to point to Starmer again. PLP support and probably 40% of the membership would be enough to get him over the line.

    If I was a Labour member, I'd vote for Starmer.
  • camelcamel Posts: 815

    Jess Philips for leader? Please God no

    Agree,a very loud airhead.
    She has contributed precisely nothing in the last three years. Nothing.
    She's been very vocal in her promotion of Jess Phillips, has campaigned ceaselessly for Jess Phillips, and has done more than most to share Jess Phillips equally across the UK population, ensuring that no hard working family will ever be without Jess Phillips again.

    Precisely nothing my arse. :)
  • saddened said:

    saddened said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    David Merritt says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me.

    Do you mean, CHB, that you were considering voting Tory before this?

    Because if so, you hid it incredibly well...
    No, it just justifies my already made decision more :)
    Well, fair play.

    I have no idea who David Merritt is, but that’s your choice.

    In my last rounds of voting I voted as follows:

    Green
    Liberal Democrat
    Conservative
    Labour
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative
    Liberal Democrat
    Plaid Cymru
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative

    So I flatter myself I am a swing voter.

    For the first time in the 18 years I have had the vote, including parish council by elections, I will be spoiling my ballot paper at this election.
    He is the father of one of the people murdered during the terrorist attack. He's attacked the Government response to it at length. If he says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me. A decent man and a tragically lost son being on my side makes me feel better about my decision.
    Not worried about the politicisation of a terrorist attack anymore then?
    If the man of somebody who was murdered wishes to make these points, I have no right to argue with him. I'm not politicising anything really, I'm just saying that having somebody decent on my side makes me feel better about my position.

    Not trying to convince anyone else - and definitely not trying to politicise the attack.
    I didn't say you were. I'm saying he is. Also that you were anti it, when you felt it may help the Tories, on Law and Order.
    Anti what? I am against jumping to conclusions about what to do about terrorists, I don't see how that's politicising anything.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,982
    JamesP said:

    Sandpit said:

    As another day moves along with no negative headlines for the Conservatives, that 1.38 for the Con Maj or Betfair looks more attractive. Serious money going on that market too, around a million in the past two days.
    It even dipped briefly to 1.37 earlier!

    It's back to 1.37.

    But I have a PB 'bad feeling' about the polls tonight, wouldn't be surprised to see the price to have drifted in 12 hours time.
    That was my fault, I dripped in a little more and took most of the 1.38 that was available.

    I'm more optimistic than you about the polls, so assuming that they're reasonably steady tonight and Johnson's private life isn't all over the Sundays, then I don't see what else could result in a big swing inside the last four days. We only need eight seats net gain for the majority.
  • Speaking as that rare thing on PB - a Labour member of the current generation supportive of the current direction of the party - I can tell you that whatever happens on Thursday there is no appetite whatsoever in the party at large for the power of the neoliberal establishment to inflict not only another Tory government on us if that is what transpires, but also the far larger prize of reasserting a tame Labour party that poses no threat and can safely be slotted in to place as Plan B.

    So whoever the candidate deemed most trusted to continue the party's current popular domestic policy direction will get the nod. I'd love to see Pidcock in there at some point but maybe she needs a bit of time to get ready for it. I could easily see a year or two with a left-leaning caretaker leader and someone young and fresh getting ready to come in for the next election.

    People keep going on about the dynamic of the battles in the eighties, Foot and 'one more heave' etc. They are failing to see the huge change in zeitgeist since then. That was when Thatcherism was in the ascendancy. After forty years it has been found wanting and whilst the Tories may manage to deny the underlying forces of nature this time due to a one-off set of circumstances - cynically using Brexit - they can't change the fact that the current system is failing to work for increasing numbers of people and they are running out of people to blame.

    And for all those who say Corbyn-era opposition has been ineffective - it has completely destroyed the political room for maneouvre of the Tories over the last few years and forced their public positioning massively leftwards. They will basically have a mandate for little more than 'getting Brexit done' and investing a load more money in public services. If Brexit fails to improve ordinary people's lives and public services keep getting worse, or if they try and do anything right wing economically that isn't in their manifesto, they will be in deep trouble very fast and this time the complete support of the media won't be able to save them.

    If their policies, against all odds, do end up improving general living standards and public services over the next five years, then fair play to them! I think in our heart of hearts we know how likely that is though.

    If not, and they look like they will crash and burn without a safe Labour leader to hand over to then we will see them trying every trick n the book to rig the democratic system in their favour but it won't be enough I'm afraid. The winds of change are too strong. And when they come Labour will have just the excuse they need to respond in kind with a constitutional convention to completely change the way democracy in this country works - electoral reform, votes for 16 year olds, Leveson on steroids.
  • camel said:

    Jess Philips for leader? Please God no

    Agree,a very loud airhead.
    She has contributed precisely nothing in the last three years. Nothing.
    She's been very vocal in her promotion of Jess Phillips, has campaigned ceaselessly for Jess Phillips, and has done more than most to share Jess Phillips equally across the UK population, ensuring that no hard working family will ever be without Jess Phillips again.

    Precisely nothing my arse. :)
    I stand corrected.

    This was the woman who proudly said she'd knife Jeremy Corbyn in the front and then tried to argue about violent language she had received. I don't condone the language she received and she doesn't deserve it - but she is a hypocrite.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261

    Ignoring for the moment the fact that it s US data, some of this might be down to increasing longevity and the later dates at which children inherit. Many of those baby boomers are still around, but their parents probably died at an earlier age than they did.
    I was thinking the same thing. Nobody loves hating on the boomers more than me, but a lot of this is down to the bastards refusing to die more than anything else. The real problem is that the elderly are increasingly disconnected from the rest of society and so problems that affect the rest of us like work life balance, cost and quality of education, commuting, rights at work aren't addressed by politicians reliant on the grey voting bloc. Not to mention the climate emergency that a lot of boomers prefer to ignore as something in the far distant future. It doesn't feel that way to my kids!
    ROFL -your knowledge of the lives we baby-boomers have led that enabled us to reach where we are is pitiful. I think I'd label your generation as 'generation whine' and toddle off to enjoy my index-linked pension given to me as a gift for no work or hardship ever.
  • camel said:

    Great header article by David Herdson. It seems it is spectacularly difficult to become Labour leader.
    Surely the next leader has to be leftish and female, but on what I have learned from the article, I'm thinking my small investment in Laura Pidcock is looking unlikely to come to fruition. In fact, it looks like a shoo in for RLB.

    Still I think Pidders is the one with the x factor.

    Still think Starmer has a decent chance, perhaps he might make it to Chancellor at the least.

    They need to have a candidate to bridge the party in at least some respect. The problem is that any policies that are vaguely similar to Corbyn's - supported by the membership - will probably not be supported by the PLP.
    What Labour desperately need is a method for the PLP to get rid of a leader.

    Corbyn might be PM next week, although it looks like that would be with the support of other parties. Cooper or Miliband or even Brown would be heading for a majority in their own right with Boris as an opponent.
    The PLP do have a method, it's a VONC that they used last time. It's just that the membership disagreed with them.

    The best solution is surely a candidate that pleases both sides, which to me seems to point to Starmer again. PLP support and probably 40% of the membership would be enough to get him over the line.

    If I was a Labour member, I'd vote for Starmer.
    In the Tory version a VONCed leader cannot stand again. Someone who loses the confidence of the parliamentary party cannot do the job of party leader effectively. I think Corbyn has shown that.
  • melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.

    But not in the same league as Blair's lies that resulted in 500,000 dead & injured in Iraq.
    You win today's Whataboutery Award.

    Yes, somewhere in the world there's a bigger liar than Johnson, so everything's ok.
    What is it you think he’s lied about so egregiously? The bus? That wasn’t lies, it was just political messaging. “Do or die”? The same.

    Maybe the reason I don’t feel lied to is that I haven’t felt misled. On those occasions, and so many others, it seemed to me that the line was delivered with a knowing wink and there was no real deception.

    Interesting that perceptions vary so wildly though, because I do understand that many genuinely think he’s a liar.
    Jeez, the list is endless. On the assumption that you're not just acting dumb I'll refer you to this article:

    https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/times-boris-johnson-flat-lied-277588

    There are numerous others available if you care to look.
  • BluerBlue said:

    saddened said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    David Merritt says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me.

    Do you mean, CHB, that you were considering voting Tory before this?

    Because if so, you hid it incredibly well...
    No, it just justifies my already made decision more :)
    Well, fair play.

    I have no idea who David Merritt is, but that’s your choice.

    In my last rounds of voting I voted as follows:

    Green
    Liberal Democrat
    Conservative
    Labour
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative
    Liberal Democrat
    Plaid Cymru
    Conservative
    Independent
    Conservative

    So I flatter myself I am a swing voter.

    For the first time in the 18 years I have had the vote, including parish council by elections, I will be spoiling my ballot paper at this election.
    He is the father of one of the people murdered during the terrorist attack. He's attacked the Government response to it at length. If he says vote anti-Tory, that's good enough for me. A decent man and a tragically lost son being on my side makes me feel better about my decision.
    Not worried about the politicisation of a terrorist attack anymore then?
    If the man of somebody who was murdered wishes to make these points, I have no right to argue with him. I'm not politicising anything really, I'm just saying that having somebody decent on my side makes me feel better about my position.

    Not trying to convince anyone else - and definitely not trying to politicise the attack.
    You literally just said that David Merritt's opinion bolsters your political voting choice for the Labour Party...
    I'm voting Lib Dem, not Labour. Read my post again.

    I said for me, having his support makes my decision easier. It was not intended to swing anyone else, so I wasn't politicising the attack to get anything. I was just discussing what I was doing.

    Sorry that you've misinterpreted what I said.
    To be fair, it seems that he himself chose to politicize the issue, so I don't blame others for taking their cue from him. And you know what? Issues of national security _should_ be political, because the threat of terrorism strikes at the heart of our physical and psychological wellbeing. I think what happened proves the exact opposite of the Labour / Lib Dem view on the subject, but that's what political debate is for.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,354

    geoffw said:

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

    When all the other votes are counted.

    They'd only know about return figures.
    Thanks. So nonsensical inference reported in the Buzzfeed piece.

  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,312
    geoffw said:

    geoffw said:

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

    When all the other votes are counted.

    They'd only know about return figures.
    Thanks. So nonsensical inference reported in the Buzzfeed piece.

    I thought postal ballots were opened earlier for validation?
  • felix said:

    Ignoring for the moment the fact that it s US data, some of this might be down to increasing longevity and the later dates at which children inherit. Many of those baby boomers are still around, but their parents probably died at an earlier age than they did.
    I was thinking the same thing. Nobody loves hating on the boomers more than me, but a lot of this is down to the bastards refusing to die more than anything else. The real problem is that the elderly are increasingly disconnected from the rest of society and so problems that affect the rest of us like work life balance, cost and quality of education, commuting, rights at work aren't addressed by politicians reliant on the grey voting bloc. Not to mention the climate emergency that a lot of boomers prefer to ignore as something in the far distant future. It doesn't feel that way to my kids!
    ROFL -your knowledge of the lives we baby-boomers have led that enabled us to reach where we are is pitiful. I think I'd label your generation as 'generation whine' and toddle off to enjoy my index-linked pension given to me as a gift for no work or hardship ever.
    I'm not sure I'd recommend rolling on the floor at your age.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,655

    Speaking as that rare thing on PB - a Labour member of the current generation supportive of the current direction of the party - I can tell you that whatever happens on Thursday there is no appetite whatsoever in the party at large for the power of the neoliberal establishment to inflict not only another Tory government on us if that is what transpires, but also the far larger prize of reasserting a tame Labour party that poses no threat and can safely be slotted in to place as Plan B.

    So whoever the candidate deemed most trusted to continue the party's current popular domestic policy direction will get the nod. I'd love to see Pidcock in there at some point but maybe she needs a bit of time to get ready for it. I could easily see a year or two with a left-leaning caretaker leader and someone young and fresh getting ready to come in for the next election.

    People keep going on about the dynamic of the battles in the eighties, Foot and 'one more heave' etc. They are failing to see the huge change in zeitgeist since then. That was when Thatcherism was in the ascendancy. After forty years it has been found wanting and whilst the Tories may manage to deny the underlying forces of nature this time due to a one-off set of circumstances - cynically using Brexit - they can't change the fact that the current system is failing to work for increasing numbers of people and they are running out of people to blame.

    And for all those who say Corbyn-era opposition has been ineffective - it has completely destroyed the political room for maneouvre of the Tories over the last few years and forced their public positioning massively leftwards. They will basically have a mandate for little more than 'getting Brexit done' and investing a load more money in public services. If Brexit fails to improve ordinary people's lives and public services keep getting worse, or if they try and do anything right wing economically that isn't in their manifesto, they will be in deep trouble very fast and this time the complete support of the media won't be able to save them.

    If their policies, against all odds, do end up improving general living standards and public services over the next five years, then fair play to them! I think in our heart of hearts we know how likely that is though.

    If not, and they look like they will crash and burn without a safe Labour leader to hand over to then we will see them trying every trick n the book to rig the democratic system in their favour but it won't be enough I'm afraid. The winds of change are too strong. And when they come Labour will have just the excuse they need to respond in kind with a constitutional convention to completely change the way democracy in this country works - electoral reform, votes for 16 year olds, Leveson on steroids.

    If you say so.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,982
    geoffw said:

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

    The envelopes are opened and verified as they arrive, every day for the past couple of weeks. Party workers observe this process and - although the ballot papers themselves stay face down throughout - say they can add up their votes by looking at canvass records or even by looking carefully at the face-down ballots.

    It's illegal to talk specifically about postal ballots if you are an observer, but obviously feedback is given to the campaigns about late targeting based on the observations.

    Personally I'm wary of comments like we see above about Labour held seats, it could be just a way of enthusing the troops on the ground, or it could be that a lot of large majorities are becoming smaller, rather than seats actually changing hands.
  • camelcamel Posts: 815

    camel said:

    Great header article by David Herdson. It seems it is spectacularly difficult to become Labour leader.
    Surely the next leader has to be leftish and female, but on what I have learned from the article, I'm thinking my small investment in Laura Pidcock is looking unlikely to come to fruition. In fact, it looks like a shoo in for RLB.

    Still I think Pidders is the one with the x factor.

    Still think Starmer has a decent chance, perhaps he might make it to Chancellor at the least.

    They need to have a candidate to bridge the party in at least some respect. The problem is that any policies that are vaguely similar to Corbyn's - supported by the membership - will probably not be supported by the PLP.
    If the leader were chosen or shortlisted wholly by elected members, I think he would make the shortlist and probably lose. However, having read David's article, I can see that to get anywhere you need the unions to believe you are made of the 'right stuff'. I don't think Sir Keir is.

    And he definitely lacks charisma; not a stump politician at all.
  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    This is a great election to lose. But I'm starting to worry that Labour might not lose it.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,354
    edited December 2019
    RobD said:

    geoffw said:

    geoffw said:

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

    When all the other votes are counted.

    They'd only know about return figures.
    Thanks. So nonsensical inference reported in the Buzzfeed piece.

    I thought postal ballots were opened earlier for validation?
    Oh! So some officials have prior knowledge of local voting trends?
    p.s. Thanks, @Sandpit, for the explanation.
  • So I take it Boris didn't crash the clown car last night. What polls are we expecting this evening?
  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
  • geoffw said:

    geoffw said:

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

    When all the other votes are counted.

    They'd only know about return figures.
    Thanks. So nonsensical inference reported in the Buzzfeed piece.

    I didn't interpret it as inference, I interpreted it as a Labour member judging voting intention based on the return of postal ballots in their seats and Buzzfeed just reporting the quote.

    The problem I have with it is that I suspect you could go back to 2017 and find an identical quote. Most people accept the Hung Parliament result came in the final days of the campaign, when I believe 10% of Labour voters made up their mind.

    Now that may well not be repeated - I have no idea - but counting your chickens with several days to go seems incredibly stupid. To put my tinfoil hat on again, I wouldn't be surprised for this to be an anti-Corbyn source because I've seen this kind of behaviour before. They may well be right and if they are, well done them - but if you're a member of a party this is really pretty bad behaviour before the result comes in.

    We all know the knives will be out on election night if Labour loses. And I am sure all the centrists will be around to say we told you so. But the people who really need a Labour Government really do not need another disunited opposition for five years. They need some Goddamn unity, whoever the leader is. And this time the PLP should get behind that leader, whoever they are. Or quite frankly they should split off, because I am tired of it.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261

    melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.
    Or that the anti-semitism scandal in the Labour party has been 'done to death' - wonder who that was the other day....
  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    I'm not convinced Johnson is in this for the long term. If Brexit is a success - what are we defining as success now, not having a recession? - then I suspect he will run away very quickly before shit hits the fan, as he did post Mayor.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 19,419
    edited December 2019
    Duplicate
  • Alright I'm quite wrong on the postal votes then, sorry about that.

    I genuinely thought they all got held and counted as the other votes did. Didn't mean to mislead anyone.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 10,470
    edited December 2019

    If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    Like most Remainers, I sincerely hope Brexit is a success. If it is, I will be here happily acknowledging it.

    I wonder if our resident Leavers will be equally candid if, as is much more likely, it is a complete clusterfuck.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,982
    geoffw said:

    RobD said:

    geoffw said:

    geoffw said:

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

    When all the other votes are counted.

    They'd only know about return figures.
    Thanks. So nonsensical inference reported in the Buzzfeed piece.

    I thought postal ballots were opened earlier for validation?
    Oh! So some officials have prior knowledge of local voting trends?
    p.s. Thanks, @Sandpit, for the explanation.
    First council link I can find on Google, explaining the process in more detail. I don't think it's changed much since I was last involved in 2010.
    https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/nominationprocesscandidatesandagents/attendpostalvoteverification
  • Speaking as that rare thing on PB - a Labour member of the current generation supportive of the current direction of the party - I can tell you that whatever happens on Thursday there is no appetite whatsoever in the party at large for the power of the neoliberal establishment to inflict not only another Tory government on us if that is what transpires, but also the far larger prize of reasserting a tame Labour party that poses no threat and can safely be slotted in to place as Plan B.

    So whoever the candidate deemed most trusted to continue the party's current popular domestic policy direction will get the nod.

    People keep going on about the dynamic of the battles in the eighties, Foot and 'one more heave' etc. They are failing to see the huge change in zeitgeist since then. That was when Thatcherism was in the ascendancy. After forty years it has been found wanting and whilst the Tories may manage to deny the underlying forces of nature this time due to a one-off set of circumstances - cynically using Brexit - they can't change the fact that the current system is failing to work for increasing numbers of people and they are running out of people to blame.

    And for all those who say Corbyn-era opposition has been ineffective - it has completely destroyed the political room for maneouvre of the Tories over the last few years and forced their public positioning massively leftwards. They will basically have a mandate for little more than 'getting Brexit done' and investing a load more money in public services. If Brexit fails to improve ordinary people's lives and public services keep getting worse, or if they try and do anything right wing economically that isn't in their manifesto, they will be in deep trouble very fast and this time the complete support of the media won't be able to save them.

    If their policies, against all odds, do end up improving general living standards and public services over the next five years, then fair play to them! I think in our heart of hearts we know how likely that is though.

    If not, and they look like they will crash and burn without a safe Labour leader to hand over to then we will see them trying every trick n the book to rig the democratic system in their favour but it won't be enough I'm afraid. The winds of change are too strong. And when they come Labour will have just the excuse they need to respond in kind with a constitutional convention to completely change the way democracy in this country works - electoral reform, votes for 16 year olds, Leveson on steroids.

    Absolutely bloody terrifying. The one thing I agree on is that the Tories need to pull out all the stops to prevent the comrades sweeping to power next time.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,354


    I didn't interpret it as inference, I interpreted it as a Labour member judging voting intention based on the return of postal ballots in their seats and Buzzfeed just reporting the quote.
    .. snip ..

    precisely what an "inference" is.

  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    This is a great election to lose. But I'm starting to worry that Labour might not lose it.
    Are you suggesting an inverse 1992 effect? Why do you think this?

    I stick by my prediction of a Hung Parliament - but in the last day or two I'll be pretty confident (or not) in that outcome. If a 6 point lead or less (which was my original marker) is maintained up to polling day, I will stick with that prediction.
  • geoffw said:


    I didn't interpret it as inference, I interpreted it as a Labour member judging voting intention based on the return of postal ballots in their seats and Buzzfeed just reporting the quote.
    .. snip ..

    precisely what an "inference" is.

    I'm sorry, you're quite right.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261

    felix said:

    Ignoring for the moment the fact that it s US data, some of this might be down to increasing longevity and the later dates at which children inherit. Many of those baby boomers are still around, but their parents probably died at an earlier age than they did.
    I was thinking the same thing. Nobody loves hating on the boomers more than me, but a lot of this is down to the bastards refusing to die more than anything else. The real problem is that the elderly are increasingly disconnected from the rest of society and so problems that affect the rest of us like work life balance, cost and quality of education, commuting, rights at work aren't addressed by politicians reliant on the grey voting bloc. Not to mention the climate emergency that a lot of boomers prefer to ignore as something in the far distant future. It doesn't feel that way to my kids!
    ROFL -your knowledge of the lives we baby-boomers have led that enabled us to reach where we are is pitiful. I think I'd label your generation as 'generation whine' and toddle off to enjoy my index-linked pension given to me as a gift for no work or hardship ever.
    I'm not sure I'd recommend rolling on the floor at your age.
    Like I said you know nothing about us - keep whining :)
  • felix said:

    melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.
    Or that the anti-semitism scandal in the Labour party has been 'done to death' - wonder who that was the other day....
    Another contender for today's Whataboutery Award. The competition is hotting up!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,982

    If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    This is a great election to lose. But I'm starting to worry that Labour might not lose it.
    Are you suggesting an inverse 1992 effect? Why do you think this?

    I stick by my prediction of a Hung Parliament - but in the last day or two I'll be pretty confident (or not) in that outcome. If a 6 point lead or less (which was my original marker) is maintained up to polling day, I will stick with that prediction.
    Betfair will let you lay the Tory majority for 1.38 at the moment, that's a shade better than 5/2 odds if you're interested?
  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    Like most Remainers, I sincerely hope Brexit is a success. If it is, I will be here happily acknowledging it.

    I wonder if our resident Leavers will be equally candid if, as is much more likely, it is a complete clusterfuck.
    We already know the answer. No.

    The measure of success now is it not being talked about and us not going into a recession.

    Nobody is arguing it will increase our growth, nobody is arguing it will be a brave new world. It's now something to be done and ignored as quickly as possible - that is not the measure of something people believe to be a success.

    Brexit is and always has been, a distraction. And any leftists should be frankly embarrassed to support it. They've been hoodwinked since day 1 - and it seems like a lot of Labour voters are about to be hoodwinked again.

    Call me an arrogant Islington Southerner all you want, I frankly don't care anymore. I've had enough abuse throughout this entire process that I don't care anymore.
  • Sandpit said:

    If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    This is a great election to lose. But I'm starting to worry that Labour might not lose it.
    Are you suggesting an inverse 1992 effect? Why do you think this?

    I stick by my prediction of a Hung Parliament - but in the last day or two I'll be pretty confident (or not) in that outcome. If a 6 point lead or less (which was my original marker) is maintained up to polling day, I will stick with that prediction.
    Betfair will let you lay the Tory majority for 1.38 at the moment, that's a shade better than 5/2 odds if you're interested?
    Already laid it at 1.5 a few days ago
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261

    felix said:

    melcf said:

    Looks like this is a pro Tories betting forum. Anything anti Tories seems to be discouraged.

    Boris Johnson is a lying, untrustworthy PM who will do anything for power.

    No-one will have a problem with that statement being posted (even if they disagree with it), variations of it are posted everyday. I didnt see your post that caused concern today but given your one from yesterday Id imagine the issue is not your being anti Tory.
    Quite. I refer regularly to Johnson as a liar and a charlatan. I have yet to encounter a dissenting voice.

    This is not because there are no Conservatives posting here.
    It's because - what's the point? Won't stop you saying it, believing it. The only thing that will change opinions is a couple of terms as PM.
    It's because it is demonstrably correct, but then I guess there is always someone prepared to say that water isn't wet.
    Or that the anti-semitism scandal in the Labour party has been 'done to death' - wonder who that was the other day....
    Another contender for today's Whataboutery Award. The competition is hotting up!
    You ok hun?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 75,434

    Lets give the richest demographic triple lock benefits, free tv licenses, travel, and compensate them for retiring EARLIER than their children. Yes those policies make great sense.
    Ouch!
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261

    If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    Like most Remainers, I sincerely hope Brexit is a success. If it is, I will be here happily acknowledging it.

    I wonder if our resident Leavers will be equally candid if, as is much more likely, it is a complete clusterfuck.
    We already know the answer. No.

    The measure of success now is it not being talked about and us not going into a recession.

    Nobody is arguing it will increase our growth, nobody is arguing it will be a brave new world. It's now something to be done and ignored as quickly as possible - that is not the measure of something people believe to be a success.

    Brexit is and always has been, a distraction. And any leftists should be frankly embarrassed to support it. They've been hoodwinked since day 1 - and it seems like a lot of Labour voters are about to be hoodwinked again.

    Call me an arrogant Islington Southerner all you want, I frankly don't care anymore. I've had enough abuse throughout this entire process that I don't care anymore.
    Did you move?- I thought you told us the other day you were in Kent.
  • Sandpit said:

    JamesP said:

    Sandpit said:

    As another day moves along with no negative headlines for the Conservatives, that 1.38 for the Con Maj or Betfair looks more attractive. Serious money going on that market too, around a million in the past two days.
    It even dipped briefly to 1.37 earlier!

    It's back to 1.37.

    But I have a PB 'bad feeling' about the polls tonight, wouldn't be surprised to see the price to have drifted in 12 hours time.
    That was my fault, I dripped in a little more and took most of the 1.38 that was available.

    I'm more optimistic than you about the polls, so assuming that they're reasonably steady tonight and Johnson's private life isn't all over the Sundays, then I don't see what else could result in a big swing inside the last four days. We only need eight seats net gain for the majority.
    Following on from @MaxPB earlier, it will depend on whether the voters decide at the last moment that the prospect of Johnson - a man who lies out of habit rather than conviction, who seeks to evade scrutiny so completely that he takes after Charles I by closing down Parliament - as PM with a large majority is one that they recoil from, or if the prospect of another Hung Parliament - paralysed with division, and a mutual lack of trust and respect - causes their hearts to sink.

    It's possible that the two effects will largely cancel out - the country is split after all - but I think there's a good chance that enough people will break decisively in one direction to produce a late swing. I'm not sure which way.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,982

    Sandpit said:

    If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    This is a great election to lose. But I'm starting to worry that Labour might not lose it.
    Are you suggesting an inverse 1992 effect? Why do you think this?

    I stick by my prediction of a Hung Parliament - but in the last day or two I'll be pretty confident (or not) in that outcome. If a 6 point lead or less (which was my original marker) is maintained up to polling day, I will stick with that prediction.
    Betfair will let you lay the Tory majority for 1.38 at the moment, that's a shade better than 5/2 odds if you're interested?
    Already laid it at 1.5 a few days ago
    Fair enough. Better odds now though ;)
  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    Like most Remainers, I sincerely hope Brexit is a success. If it is, I will be here happily acknowledging it.

    I wonder if our resident Leavers will be equally candid if, as is much more likely, it is a complete clusterfuck.
    We already know the answer. No.

    The measure of success now is it not being talked about and us not going into a recession.

    Nobody is arguing it will increase our growth, nobody is arguing it will be a brave new world. It's now something to be done and ignored as quickly as possible - that is not the measure of something people believe to be a success.

    Brexit is and always has been, a distraction. And any leftists should be frankly embarrassed to support it. They've been hoodwinked since day 1 - and it seems like a lot of Labour voters are about to be hoodwinked again.

    Call me an arrogant Islington Southerner all you want, I frankly don't care anymore. I've had enough abuse throughout this entire process that I don't care anymore.
    In fairness, very few serious Leavers have argued that it will be of economic benefit. The argument has generally been more about 'sovereignity' and similar mystical benefits. Semi-religious beliefs tend to dissolve when confronted with harsh realities, but no doubt there will always be some who cling to them long after the bulk of the supporters have drifted away.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    Speaking as that rare thing on PB - a Labour member of the current generation supportive of the current direction of the party - I can tell you r prize of reasserting a tame Labour party that poses no threat and can safely be slotted in to place as Plan B.

    So whoever the candidate deemed most trusted to continue the party's current popular domestic policy direction will get the nod. I'd love to see Pidcock in there at some point but maybe she needs a bit of time to get ready for it. I could easily see a year or two with a left-leaning caretaker leader and someone young and fresh getting ready to come in for the next election.

    People keep going on about the dynamic of the battles in the eighties, Foot and 'one more heave' etc. They are failing to see the huge change in zeitgeist since then. That was when Thatcherism was in the ascendancy. After forty years it has been found wanting and whilst the Tories may manage to deny the underlying forces of nature this time due to a one-off set of circumstances - cynically using Brexit - they can't change the fact that the current system is failing to work for increasing numbers of people and they are running out of people to blame.

    And for all those who say Corbyn-era opposition has been ineffective - it has completely destroyed the political room for maneouvre of the Tories over the last few years and forced their public positioning massively leftwards. They will basically have a mandate for little more than 'getting Brexit done' and investing a load more money in public services. If Brexit fails to improve ordinary people's lives and public services keep getting worse, or if they try and do anything right wing economically that isn't in their manifesto, they will be in deep trouble very fast and this time the complete support of the media won't be able to save them.

    If their policies, against all odds, do end up improving general living standards and public services over the next five years, then fair play to them! I think in our heart of hearts we know how likely that is though.

    If not, and they look like they will crash and burn without a safe Labour leader to hand over to then we will see them trying every trick n the book to rig the democratic system in their favour but it won't be enough I'm afraid. The winds of change are too strong. And when they come Labour will have just the excuse they need to respond in kind with a constitutional convention to completely change the way democracy in this country works - electoral reform, votes for 16 year olds, Leveson on steroids.

    Thanks for the hopeful message. I'm not so certain, though I'm generally optimistic. I'd warn against complacency though- don't just assume things are inevitably moving in our direction, it's going to be a fight.
  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    Like most Remainers, I sincerely hope Brexit is a success. If it is, I will be here happily acknowledging it.

    I wonder if our resident Leavers will be equally candid if, as is much more likely, it is a complete clusterfuck.
    The problem is the definition of clusterfuck. As I have made clear since long before Cameron ever mooted a referendum, for me leaving the EU has nothing to do with economics. In fact I have advocated a far closer economic relationship than we are likely to end up with but for me that was, is and always will be, secondary to the basic principles of self determination and democracy.

    Like many on here on both sides I don't expect Brexit to be either an economic disaster or a great economic boon. The reasons for supporting Brexit are far more fundamental than that.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,655

    If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    Like most Remainers, I sincerely hope Brexit is a success. If it is, I will be here happily acknowledging it.

    I wonder if our resident Leavers will be equally candid if, as is much more likely, it is a complete clusterfuck.
    We already know the answer. No.

    The measure of success now is it not being talked about and us not going into a recession.

    Nobody is arguing it will increase our growth, nobody is arguing it will be a brave new world. It's now something to be done and ignored as quickly as possible - that is not the measure of something people believe to be a success.

    Brexit is and always has been, a distraction. And any leftists should be frankly embarrassed to support it. They've been hoodwinked since day 1 - and it seems like a lot of Labour voters are about to be hoodwinked again.

    Call me an arrogant Islington Southerner all you want, I frankly don't care anymore. I've had enough abuse throughout this entire process that I don't care anymore.
    In fairness, very few serious Leavers have argued that it will be of economic benefit. The argument has generally been more about 'sovereignity' and similar mystical benefits. Semi-religious beliefs tend to dissolve when confronted with harsh realities, but no doubt there will always be some who cling to them long after the bulk of the supporters have drifted away.
    That's what will happen to Labour, particularly if they get crushed on Thursday. The policies of Labour are absolutely mad.
  • HenriettaHenrietta Posts: 136
    edited December 2019
    (deleted)
  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    Like most Remainers, I sincerely hope Brexit is a success. If it is, I will be here happily acknowledging it.

    I wonder if our resident Leavers will be equally candid if, as is much more likely, it is a complete clusterfuck.
    We already know the answer. No.

    The measure of success now is it not being talked about and us not going into a recession.

    Nobody is arguing it will increase our growth, nobody is arguing it will be a brave new world. It's now something to be done and ignored as quickly as possible - that is not the measure of something people believe to be a success.

    Brexit is and always has been, a distraction. And any leftists should be frankly embarrassed to support it. They've been hoodwinked since day 1 - and it seems like a lot of Labour voters are about to be hoodwinked again.

    Call me an arrogant Islington Southerner all you want, I frankly don't care anymore. I've had enough abuse throughout this entire process that I don't care anymore.
    To oppose Brexit on economic grounds and then support Corbyn is one of the wildest, most illogical positions it is possible to take.
  • Alright I'm quite wrong on the postal votes then, sorry about that.

    I genuinely thought they all got held and counted as the other votes did. Didn't mean to mislead anyone.

    Fair play to you

    I would just comment that at this time in 2017 I became quite concerned that the conservative landslide was not happening and the concern grew daily until David Herdson posted just before election day confirming my fears

    It was at that time I called it a hung parliament.

    The reason for my loss of confidence was a result of a lot of anecdotal evidence mainly from canvassersof sliding support for the conservatives and the narrowing polls

    This year none of this is evident and indeed the anecdotal evidence is increasing that labour are in trouble in important marginals and Scotland.

    I am watching carefully information from multiple sources for any evidence of the 2017 late closing of the polls and I promise you, if I detect any similar pattern, I will comment on it as I did in 2017
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,982

    Sandpit said:

    JamesP said:

    Sandpit said:

    As another day moves along with no negative headlines for the Conservatives, that 1.38 for the Con Maj or Betfair looks more attractive. Serious money going on that market too, around a million in the past two days.
    It even dipped briefly to 1.37 earlier!

    It's back to 1.37.

    But I have a PB 'bad feeling' about the polls tonight, wouldn't be surprised to see the price to have drifted in 12 hours time.
    That was my fault, I dripped in a little more and took most of the 1.38 that was available.

    I'm more optimistic than you about the polls, so assuming that they're reasonably steady tonight and Johnson's private life isn't all over the Sundays, then I don't see what else could result in a big swing inside the last four days. We only need eight seats net gain for the majority.
    Following on from @MaxPB earlier, it will depend on whether the voters decide at the last moment that the prospect of Johnson - a man who lies out of habit rather than conviction, who seeks to evade scrutiny so completely that he takes after Charles I by closing down Parliament - as PM with a large majority is one that they recoil from, or if the prospect of another Hung Parliament - paralysed with division, and a mutual lack of trust and respect - causes their hearts to sink.

    It's possible that the two effects will largely cancel out - the country is split after all - but I think there's a good chance that enough people will break decisively in one direction to produce a late swing. I'm not sure which way.
    Good post. This definitely feels like an election where people are voting for the least-worst option as opposed to making a positive choice, a 1992 rather than a 1997 or 2010 scenario.

    How on Earth we address the collective problem of crap politicians, crap media and a divisive political discourse is a much bigger problem.
  • If Brexit ends up being a disaster - which I think it will - we're almost certainly headed for a Labour Government in 2024. It will either be a landslide with a centrist or a modest win with a leftist, I would think. Up to the Labour Party which they prefer - but I would expect we will have a repeat of 1997 in that case.

    I wonder if this election will turn out as 1992.

    What happens if Brexit is not a disaster though? It’s not likely I admit, but it could happen. Boris does something stupidly terminal early in 2020, someone sensible takes over... I haven’t thought this through, have I?
    Like most Remainers, I sincerely hope Brexit is a success. If it is, I will be here happily acknowledging it.

    I wonder if our resident Leavers will be equally candid if, as is much more likely, it is a complete clusterfuck.
    We already know the answer. No.

    The measure of success now is it not being talked about and us not going into a recession.

    Nobody is arguing it will increase our growth, nobody is arguing it will be a brave new world. It's now something to be done and ignored as quickly as possible - that is not the measure of something people believe to be a success.

    Brexit is and always has been, a distraction. And any leftists should be frankly embarrassed to support it. They've been hoodwinked since day 1 - and it seems like a lot of Labour voters are about to be hoodwinked again.

    Call me an arrogant Islington Southerner all you want, I frankly don't care anymore. I've had enough abuse throughout this entire process that I don't care anymore.
    In fairness, very few serious Leavers have argued that it will be of economic benefit. The argument has generally been more about 'sovereignity' and similar mystical benefits. Semi-religious beliefs tend to dissolve when confronted with harsh realities, but no doubt there will always be some who cling to them long after the bulk of the supporters have drifted away.
    If you think democracy and sovereignty are mystical beliefs, why were you in any way bothered by Johnson's antics over prorogation?
  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 4,460

    Sandpit said:

    The Tories have to be very careful with pushing this Russian angle, and I suspect are limiting it slightly more than their press for that reason, because they know how easy it is for this to shift the agenda back to the Russia report.

    Yes when told I need to be wary of Russian meddling in the election, my first thought was why cant we see the Russia report! How else am I supposed to be wary?
    Purdah. The Government machinery doesn't publish anything remotely political in the middle of an election campaign.
    This was not the reason the report was not published *before* the campaign, however.
    If Johnson wins a good majority I bet the report will never see the light of day
  • DeClareDeClare Posts: 483
    geoffw said:

    RobD said:

    geoffw said:

    geoffw said:

    Nugget:

    "One reason for the renewed [Tory] confidence is early indications from postal votes in so-called ‘Red Wall’ Tory target seats in the North. Postal voting is not supposed to leak, but at every election there is informed speculation from local officials that often changes the way parties campaign in the final days.

    A message sent by a Labour official in the north to colleagues last week, seen by BuzzFeed News, stated that “postal votes in all Labour seats are bad” and ordered activists to stay in so-called “defensive” seats already held by the party, rather than head to “offensive” target seats held by Tories."
    At what point do postal vote envelopes get opened?

    When all the other votes are counted.

    They'd only know about return figures.
    Thanks. So nonsensical inference reported in the Buzzfeed piece.

    I thought postal ballots were opened earlier for validation?
    Oh! So some officials have prior knowledge of local voting trends?
    p.s. Thanks, @Sandpit, for the explanation.
    Correct - Postal votes are opened in front of witnesses, usually party agents and the like, they are validated, but they are not counted, the papers are put into a sealed bag and after validation of the polling station votes, the seals are removed from the bags, the papers added to the non postal papers and they are all counted together.
    The witnesses are not supposed to talk about what information they may have learned from the postal votes to anyone else but information does leak out.
    I live in a marginal constituency and on Tuesday I spotted a Tory councillor in the pub, I asked him if he'd had any info regarding the postal votes opened so far and he wouldn't say, but he had a big smile and was very upbeat about the election prospects.
This discussion has been closed.