Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Starmer needs a net gain of 124 seats at the next GE to win a
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Starmer needs a net gain of 124 seats at the next GE to win a majority, here’s that in context
!function(){"use strict";window.addEventListener("message",function(a){if(void 0!==a.data["datawrapper-height"])for(var e in a.data["datawrapper-height"]){var t=document.getElementById("datawrapper-chart-"+e)||document.querySelector("iframe[src*='"+e+"']");t&&(t.style.height=a.data["datawrapper-height"][e]+"px")}})}();
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Curse you Ishmael :-)
In the future we will all think of two eras: pre-covid and post. It's not impossible to think that Starmer could be the Attlee to Boris' ersatz Churchill.
won't see the true toll for around a month until we see the ONS death stats, which lag by 3 weeks on average, plus some days depending on whether these tests are in early stage of infection or what.
NHS nurse after a shift
Staying indoors and not sunbathing not so hard - come on people
Otherwise, seems a reasonable point. The last time a majority as big as this was overturned in one go was fifty years ago. My personal view however is that while 40 gains may get them into government it will require 70 gains for them to stay in it for very long. That’s still a pretty big ask.
She has to go even if we have to replace her with an empty podium.
Some great fucking example she is.
I believe we are heading into an economic depression the likes of which none of us have ever seen, that will require government intervention on a level no Conservative would be comfortable.
But Johnson is perhaps enough of a populist to adapt to the times. Whether he will bring his party with him is another matter. As you say, there will be spare political space to the right.
How can she have been so cloth eared?
My son not tested, nor his girlfriends step dad
As others have commented, if Labour can become a non-socialist party of the centre or centre-left as it was under Blair, it won't matter about "Blue Walls" or anything else. The 1997 tide swept the Conservatives back to their core heartlands.
Could 2024 be like 1945 or 1997? Short answer, nobody knows and as TSE points out, trying to second guess the future political landscape is close to impossible - Covid-19 is the high tide and all the sandcastles on the beach have been destroyed.
Starmer can be anything you want him to be at his stage but the Devil will, as it always is, be in the detail of practical policies and programmes. The recovery from the coming recession/depression (delete as appropriate) may be long or short but the cultural and psychological memory of this will linger in a way that, for instance the fuel crisis of 2000 didn't.
This is as seminal an event as the Winter of Discontent or the Three Day Week from the 70s - it will influence us in ways we don't yet realise for years to come.
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/1246796590200782849
https://twitter.com/mattwardman/status/1246799986462949376
I am fortunate that I have a huge (indeed, overlarge) sunroom I am basking in at the moment.
Again, somebody in a bijou flat in Walthamstow doesn’t have that option.
There will be matters of cold calculation in all this, that happens with major societal issues which affect millions and billions, it is inevitable and not a sign of anything awful in my view - as with any mass system there will always be issues without undermining the overall benefits for exampe - but the personal stories and tragedies are not being lost, they can exist side by side.
there has to be.
If Starmer matched Blair's 1997 gains he would have a small majority but remember 1997 was after 18 years of Tory government not 14 as 2024 will be.
If he only matches Kinnock's 1992 gains then the Tories should hold on as even with SNP and LD support he would likely be unable to form a government and hard to see him holding SNP and DUP support
Many have come to see the influence of pornography for the destructive and corrosive thing it is, it's only the oldies who think it's harmless these days.
Make them drink tap water as well.
IF the "new concensus" emerges around a more left of centre model, that won't hurt Labour as they will be in a good position to offer "the same but with a human face and a history of believing in the NHS". As long as the tenets of Sunakism (new word, you heard it first, here folks!) are retained, Starmer may well look a welcome alternative to Johnson simply because he will be different.
The ones round here are, shall we say, amply proportioned.
https://twitter.com/AlistairHaimes/status/1246728227206434816
She's an alumna of the JCL college Newnham which makes Dr Calderwood at the top of her field.
Blair managed a 10% swing, Cameron 5%. Indeed, Thatcher in 1979 (who is some way down the list) managed 5.2%.
It's unlikely, though, and would require a fair few SNP seats as well as Tory (which is another challenge altogether).
I agree that it'd be brave to bet on a Labour majority. His best chance of being PM is probably to start by depriving the Tories of a majority (only a 2% swing required for that - the 40th is Wycombe with a modest 3.85% majority). That would probably at least buy him a second bite of the cherry, and may give him the chance to form a Government depending how far beyond that he gets.
Labour need to be careful on targeting - there is a danger if they target 150+ for a decent majority, it jeopardises their chances of a more realistic good outcome. Privately, I'd seriously aim for no more than 100, with some "development" seats in case the picture starts looking bright a year out from an election.
Presumably no-one lives at her second home.
Sometimes I go into Waitrose and don't quite know what I want but I know I want to buy something nice for my family.
That was spectacularly politically unwise. A degree of distancing, social or not, would have been sensible here.
https://twitter.com/murdo_fraser/status/1246800788736933889?s=20
https://twitter.com/Jackson_Carlaw/status/1246799316993310722?s=20
I must be in the 3-4% of the population opposing stupid rules.
I'm struggling with how we move from the current status back toward normality without a risk of renewed cases.
Almost every scenario based on some form of resumption of normal activity seems to drive a coach and horses through notions of social distancing and self isolation.
I also had the chance to watch Jacinda Ardern at her latest Press Conference - she has grown into the job as NZ's PM remarkably well. Her comment when asked about the economic damage of a prolonged lock down was:
"A strategy that sacrifices people in favour of, supposedly, a better economic outcome is a false dichotomy and has been shown to produce the worst of both worlds: loss of life and prolonged economic pain,"
The argument therefore is IF lock down is ended too quickly and there is a second wave of cases the economic pain is going to be extended and intensified not foreshortened and reduced
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
This is target 124:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_North_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
The SNP hold it by 49% to 28%.
A 5.25% takes Filton and Bradley Stoke, target no. 59. That would still be a greater swing than Thatcher managed.
I find it rather distasteful.
What other Government guidance can we safely ignore?
I mean, seriously, get a grip people.
https://www.wilko.com/
I haven't seen anyone in my town or village taking this anything but very seriously.
A few families went out on their bikes together yesterday. They kept welll back and clear of others. I think that's fine.
I go in both with a list (of things I know I need) and also have a look for other nice things I might not have thought about.
In which case I completely reverse my earlier position - that's a really bad map for Starmer and he'd be mad not to go for a two election strategy (privately - he can't admit to it of course).
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
We’d already had updates to the UK deaths causing significant changes, and it was highlighted that we weren’t recording deaths outside of hospitals.
I realised that the data was so unreliable at this stage, it wasn’t really worth doing.
Agree on the browsing, but how do you maintain 2m while pushing them out of the door?
OTOH Wilko sell sweeping brushes, so they could use those :-) .
On 16 March Norway had 1077 cases and 1 death, while Sweden had 992 cases and 3 deaths. On 4 April Norway had 5208 cases and 44 deaths, while Sweden had 6078 cases and 333 deaths. Sweden's apparent fatality rate is 6.5 times higher than Norway's, which no doubt means the percentage of cases they are detecting is only 10-20% of the percentage Norway is detecting.