Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Classic Trump....USA...USA...USA....80% Chinese owned...National Security, National Security, National Security, China still have the algorithm...Drain the swamp, drain the swamp, drain the swamp, one of my donors has got the contract.
Not correct. The whole point of this dispute was not TikTok per se but Trump wanting to make clear that he would be prepared to go nuclear on an important area for the Chinese. You can debate whether this will mean any real oversight but what the whole TikTok issue has done is put a mighty spanner in the works of the idea that Chinese tech firms can take over the world.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Don't you think it is both a tiny bit childish and a tiny bit morally, politically and intellectually bankrupt to be saying, effectively, "I'm the king of the castle for the next three years and there's nothing you can do about it, so there?" If that is your best point (and it is), silence is an alternative worth considering.
Thanks for the advice. I've considered it, and will keep posting whatever the hell I please, thank you very much.
Oddly enough, I haven't noticed you recommending silence to those spamming hundreds of posts and retweets that consist of nothing more than whining or childish jibes, but whatever floats your boat. They can say what they like, and so can I.
There appears to be a big dose of that viewpoint where my son lives.
Indeed. Thinkforyourself appears to be super trendy. Ironically it involves no thinking. Merely believing the opposite of conventional wisdom. Which is sometimes useful and usually harmless. But in this case actively malevolent. Numpties like this will be the ones to entomb the economy.
Reading through the thread last night, I learned a few things about covid (before quitting reading in a bit of depression).
- I learned that it was stupid to believe that a virus spread by direct human contact could possibly have its spread limited by restricting the amount of direct human contact.
- I learned that apparently people believe that the Government hasn't updated any data in any models since March and continue to use the pre-March data religiously.
- I learned that the best model of combating covid was "provably" to adopt one that involved worse economic impacts than your neighbours, having fewer freedoms than your neighbours for several months (ie since mid-May) and ten times the death rate of your neighbours.
- I learned that when the architects of such models say that every country is different, that the only reason they could follow their model in the first place was due to a slower initial increase in their country and in the UK the far faster initial increase meant that other measures obviously had to be considered, and that their model really consisted of finding a level where restrictions meant the spread wasn't exploding AND NOT REDUCING FROM THERE, he meant that actually we should have done exactly what they did and magically things would somehow have been better for us.
It was a bit of an eye-opener.
Have you not stopped to consider even for a moment whether the UK government’s lockdown policy increased or decreased direct human contacts with infected people for the most vulnerable (i.e. care home residents)?
Or whether the near global policy of trying to reduce direct human contacts between non vulnerable groups to zero may in turn have significant downsides to overcoming the virus, for example through slower acquired population immunity and slower reproductive cycling of the virus, impeding mutation into less lethal strains.
Much less the significant wider health downsides of lockdown that the UK government and others have admitted to, with perhaps 2 deaths directly causes by lockdown for every 3 from covid in the case of the UK?
Or whether any lives saved and morbidities prevented from Covid have been worth the economic, social and democratic cost? Not just in the UK but developing economies, with 135m now at increased risk of starvation according to the UN?
It is easy to just accept Dominic Cummings’ simplistic three word slogans, be a good boy scout and adopt a sneering and superior tone to anyone that bemoans the futility and wider damage of lockdown. It’s somewhat more difficult to understand what the goal of government policy is right now, given the NHS was already successfully protected, the curve flattened, time was bought to deliver improved ICU outcomes and for uncertain reasons deaths are still lagging new “cases” in Europe to a far greater extent than earlier in the year.
"It’s somewhat more difficult to understand what the goal of government policy is right now"
Absolutely.
The strong suspicion is that the policy is now zero-covid.
I don't think so.
Zero-covid would entail getting R down to zero.
The ambition since the summer seems to have been to keep R about 1 until a vaccine becomes available, keepng the virus contained and minimal - neither exponentially growing, nor zero.
No the battle since the beginning has been to keep R as low as possible and definitely below 1. The return of children to school seems to have brought it back above 1...
I really don't think so. In the spring that was the ambition but from the summer onwards when lockdown has been lifted the ambition has been a balancing act to keep R at or below 1 while lifting as much of the lockdown as possible.
If we'd wanted zero covid that was achievable but would have entailed zero foreign travel and maintaining lockdown. That was never what has been done. Don't you remember the quotation about being 'at the limits of what is possible to unlock'? That was saying we'd got R back up to 1 and unlocking more would entail cases rising again - which is what seems to have happened.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
Classic Trump....USA...USA...USA....80% Chinese owned...National Security, National Security, National Security, China still have the algorithm...Drain the swamp, drain the swamp, drain the swamp, one of my donors has got the contract.
Not correct. The whole point of this dispute was not TikTok per se but Trump wanting to make clear that he would be prepared to go nuclear on an important area for the Chinese. You can debate whether this will mean any real oversight but what the whole TikTok issue has done is put a mighty spanner in the works of the idea that Chinese tech firms can take over the world.
Riiighhhttt.
Now they can only take over 80% of the world and have a controlling stake. Great job!
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
You stuck to us peasant scum, and we losers should be licking your boots for eternity!
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
Actually the prerogative issue had largely been dealt with by the Septennial Act as amended already.
The FTPA repealed the Septennial Act. A repealed FTPA would need to be replaced with a new equivalent of the Septennial Act . . . though almost certainly with a different name.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
I'm sure we'll find a way. So in any case, September / October 2024 is entirely possible, and in my view likely.
Classic Trump....USA...USA...USA....80% Chinese owned...National Security, National Security, National Security, China still have the algorithm...Drain the swamp, drain the swamp, drain the swamp, one of my donors has got the contract.
Not correct. The whole point of this dispute was not TikTok per se but Trump wanting to make clear that he would be prepared to go nuclear on an important area for the Chinese. You can debate whether this will mean any real oversight but what the whole TikTok issue has done is put a mighty spanner in the works of the idea that Chinese tech firms can take over the world.
Riiighhhttt.
Now they can only take over 80% of the world and have a controlling stake. Great job!
I will believe Trump / the west is serious about tackling China's influence in tech when force restrictions on Tencent ownership of Western companies...and no forcing WeChat out of the play store doesn't count.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
Actually the prerogative issue had largely been dealt with by the Septennial Act as amended already.
The FTPA repealed the Septennial Act. A repealed FTPA would need to be replaced with a new equivalent of the Septennial Act . . . though almost certainly with a different name.
Until the Septennial Act it was entirely the monarch's decision when to dissolve parliament and to call an election under the royal prerogative, given the Septennial Act has been repealed if the FTPA was repealed too until new legislation was passed the decision when the next general election was held would once again return to the monarch and be entirely at the discretion of the Queen or in 4 years potentially King Charles IIIrd
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
I'm sure we'll find a way. So in any case, September / October 2024 is entirely possible, and in my view likely.
That's four full years from today.
If it is then that's a bad sign. It means the PM isn't confident of winning an election sooner.
A PM that is confident normally goes sooner. See: 1983, 1987, 2001, 2005, 2017 (confidence was hubris) and 2019. A last minute election is because the PM has no confidence they will win even if they might. See: 1992, 1997, 2010 and 2015.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
Actually the prerogative issue had largely been dealt with by the Septennial Act as amended already.
The FTPA repealed the Septennial Act. A repealed FTPA would need to be replaced with a new equivalent of the Septennial Act . . . though almost certainly with a different name.
Until the Septennial Act it was entirely the monarch's decision when to dissolve parliament and to call an election under the royal prerogative, given the Septennial Act has been repealed if the FTPA was repealed too until new legislation was passed the decision when the next general election was held would once again return to the monarch and be entirely at the discretion of the Queen or in 4 years potentially King Charles IIIrd
There is no certainty of that and there isn't the slightest chance on earth that Parliament would repeal the FTPA without a replacement Act to replace it anyway.
The repeal of the Septennial Act was timed with the passing of the FTPA and were done in conjuction together. The same would need to occur with the repeal of the FTPA, simply repealing the FTPA without a replacement would never get through Parliament.
Ok, can he outline in a few short steps how this can be achieved? I'm all for more testing and getting to the place he suggests, what is Labour's plan to achieve that. This is, once again, why he's making absolutely no impression. Where is Labour's shadow health secretary setting out what Labour would do differently. The assumption that the government doesn't share that goal is what's wrong, the obviously do, they are just completely incompetent. The issue isn't the goal, it's the process, everyone can see that and Starmer not realising that is pretty disappointing.
All he does is say he would do the same as Boris has, then criticise the way Boris did it. Hardly opposition. It was bad enough when he was just boring, but now it transpires he is a petty, nagging aftertimer. At least Jezza offered something different, and believed in it.
Afternoon all. Off topic. Back to the horrid virus –
So the second wind is upon us and we need to hunker down again. Inevitable really. No point bitching about it imo. Keep a lid on sickness and death until the vaccine next year (mass rollout in June) is the name of the game. Fine. But what I do NOT want to see is any "Boris" yuletide bullshit. I can quite imagine - and I'm being totally serious here - that there will be tight restrictions in place over the autumn and then lo and behold on or around 12th Dec (yuck awful date) comes a PM televised address, and there he will be, Perfidious Posh, sitting in number 10 next to a cosily decorated tree, Santa hat on, and he'll announce in that ghastly, faux-matey way he has that the People's government is suspending the Covid rules completely from the 24th to the 26th so that we can all have a proper Christmas, which we deserve on account of our hard work and sacrifice. Much cheer and relief across a nation now so denuded of critical faculties that millions start singing "For he's a jolly good fellow!" at their TV screens and the prospect immediately gets known as our “Boris Christmas”. “What are you planning for Boris Christmas?” people ask each other when they meet. “Are you going to the in laws?” If things go down like this I’ll be extremely pissed off. But otherwise, pecker up, chin chin, mustn’t grumble, and similar.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
Actually the prerogative issue had largely been dealt with by the Septennial Act as amended already.
The FTPA repealed the Septennial Act. A repealed FTPA would need to be replaced with a new equivalent of the Septennial Act . . . though almost certainly with a different name.
Until the Septennial Act it was entirely the monarch's decision when to dissolve parliament and to call an election under the royal prerogative, given the Septennial Act has been repealed if the FTPA was repealed too until new legislation was passed the decision when the next general election was held would once again return to the monarch and be entirely at the discretion of the Queen or in 4 years potentially King Charles IIIrd
There is no certainty of that and there isn't the slightest chance on earth that Parliament would repeal the FTPA without a replacement Act to replace it anyway.
The repeal of the Septennial Act was timed with the passing of the FTPA and were done in conjuction together. The same would need to occur with the repeal of the FTPA, simply repealing the FTPA without a replacement would never get through Parliament.
In the absence of statutory legislation then the royal prerogative applies so yes a replacement act would be needed at the same time as repeal or else the power would revert to the Crown
Thanks, Scott. I didn't know so many models were around.
I tend to use and stick with 538 because it has a strong reputation and I know and understand its quirks. One of these it tends to filter in a certain amount of subjective judgement (or common sense and intuition if you like). This may be why it is a bit less strong on Biden than most of the others which I suspect read stright across from the polls. That certainly seems to be the case with The Economist which is the other modeller I'm familiar with. I wouldn't knock it, but prefer 538.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
I'm sure we'll find a way. So in any case, September / October 2024 is entirely possible, and in my view likely.
That's four full years from today.
If you can avoid restoring the Royal Prerogative you can crack on for longer.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
I'm sure we'll find a way. So in any case, September / October 2024 is entirely possible, and in my view likely.
That's four full years from today.
If it is then that's a bad sign. It means the PM isn't confident of winning an election sooner.
A PM that is confident normally goes sooner. See: 1983, 1987, 2001, 2005, 2017 (confidence was hubris) and 2019. A last minute election is because the PM has no confidence they will win even if they might. See: 1992, 1997, 2010 and 2015.
After ten or more years in power governments normally lose eg 1964, 1997 and 2010 and even in the only post WW2 exception in 1992 it was close and Major waited the full 5 years so yes the odds are there will be no election called until 2024
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Don't you think it is both a tiny bit childish and a tiny bit morally, politically and intellectually bankrupt to be saying, effectively, "I'm the king of the castle for the next three years and there's nothing you can do about it, so there?" If that is your best point (and it is), silence is an alternative worth considering.
Thanks for the advice. I've considered it, and will keep posting whatever the hell I please, thank you very much.
Oddly enough, I haven't noticed you recommending silence to those spamming hundreds of posts and retweets that consist of nothing more than whining or childish jibes, but whatever floats your boat. They can say what they like, and so can I.
Sure. I was just pointing out that the subtext of your post is "The tories are a bunch of rebarbative arsewipes with nothing to recommend them beyond incumbency," and I wasn't sure that was the message you intended to put across. Only trying to help.
I see ANTIFA are back to smashing up Portland every night, after taking a few days off because of the wild fires.
Have you any evidence "ANTIFA" are doing this or are you just parroting that because that's what Trump says?
Specifically in Portland, it really isn't in doubt, that there is a hardcore element that are far left grouping that appear under the umbrella of claiming to be antifascist protestors.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
Actually the prerogative issue had largely been dealt with by the Septennial Act as amended already.
The FTPA repealed the Septennial Act. A repealed FTPA would need to be replaced with a new equivalent of the Septennial Act . . . though almost certainly with a different name.
Until the Septennial Act it was entirely the monarch's decision when to dissolve parliament and to call an election under the royal prerogative, given the Septennial Act has been repealed if the FTPA was repealed too until new legislation was passed the decision when the next general election was held would once again return to the monarch and be entirely at the discretion of the Queen or in 4 years potentially King Charles IIIrd
There is no certainty of that and there isn't the slightest chance on earth that Parliament would repeal the FTPA without a replacement Act to replace it anyway.
The repeal of the Septennial Act was timed with the passing of the FTPA and were done in conjuction together. The same would need to occur with the repeal of the FTPA, simply repealing the FTPA without a replacement would never get through Parliament.
In the absence of statutory legislation then the royal prerogative applies so yes a replacement act would be needed at the same time as repeal or else the power would revert to the Crown
But currently there is no Royal Prerogative post repeal of FTPA.
I see ANTIFA are back to smashing up Portland every night, after taking a few days off because of the wild fires.
Have you any evidence "ANTIFA" are doing this or are you just parroting that because that's what Trump says?
In Portland, it really isn't in doubt, that there is a hardcore element that are far left grouping that appear under the umbrella of being antifascist protestors.
In Portland there really isn't a doubt that people are protesting who like to protest, including people from out of state who are going there because they like violence and want to take part in violence. That includes extremists from the far left and far right.
I've not seen any evidence that this is organised by "ANTIFA" encouraging violence and destruction.
I also note the Police deployed tear gas last night after being ordered not to by their Mayor. If the Police just ignore the Mayor they are out of control and causing violence themselves.
Nate's model suggests zero at 6-1 is some value, the combination of Biden winning all 6 states occurs 22 times out of the hundred scenarios giving Biden his current ~ 77% chance of winning
The alarm has been sounded with localised lockdowns. And the local lockdowns have been not just in bits of cities but have covered vast swathes. EG the "Northwest lockdown" covered areas from Greater Manchester, through East Lancashire and West Yorkshire.
That's a vast area that covers a greater area I believe than Greater London alone, even if it might not be as much population.
Starmer also says he does not want 'another divisive Scottish referendum' on independence
'Does not want' is by no means the same as ruling one out, which is what PM Johnson has said.
Well as the Tories have a majority of 80 until 2024 what he says only matters after then anyway
Thought at least one of those elected as a Tory had been expelled? Must say I originally thought the next election wouldn't be until 2024; now I'm not so sure.
Unless polls consistently come out showing a 20% +Tory lead for six months, very unlikely now, there will not be an election until 2024, that is guaranteed
Is It your belief that if the PM changes, they should seek their own mandate as May and Johnson both did?
No, Brown did not, Major did not and nor will should any successor for Boris, however as I have said I remain of the view Boris will stay Tory leader and PM until 2024
Brown was widely criticised for not and likely lost support in the polls as a result of not having an election.
Ironically enough he inherited a similar position to what Johnson's successor might.
Brown made the sensible decision, he had a comfortable majority of 66 and therefore would have been an idiot to risk that at an early election, especially as the polls were neck and neck after the 2007 party conferences, in the end he got another 3 years as PM before losing power (while still preventing an outright Tory majority in 2010).
May and Boris were in a different scenario as May only had a small majority of 12 and Boris had no majority at all, the Tories now have a majority of 80 so are far closer to the position Labour were under when Brown too over ie very little to gain and everything to lose from an early election
I recall a Boris Johnson (ring any bells?) criticising Brown strongly.
So what Boris would not be the new PM anyway, it would likely be Sunak and Boris is the elected PM already.
We Tories had to wait a full 5 years from when Cameron was elected Tory leader in 2005 until the next general election in 2010 so I am sure you Labour supporters can wait 4 years after Starmer was elected Labour leader until election 2024
The Labour fantasists think they're going to be in power tomorrow. The rest of 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, and well into 2024 before they even get a chance are going to drag for them, I fear
Under the terms of the FTPA the next election is due on 2nd May 2024 - just over 3 years and 7 months from today.If we go back in time for the same period, we find ouselves in February 2017 in the middle of the Copeland by-election campaign and 7 months beyond Theresa May becoming PM. That still feels pretty recent to me.
Except that repeal of the FTPA is explicitly promised in the Conservative manifesto, and so can be implemented at any time, without obstruction from the Lords. There's no reason whatsoever why the next election can't be in the autumn of 2024. I'd even be tempted to go with December - it just feels lucky, for some reason...
Very unlikely to be later than October 2024.Moreover replacing the FTPA is somewhat problematic in that it might mean restoring the Royal Prerogative which was removed by the 2011Act.Apparently there is no precedent for that.
Actually the prerogative issue had largely been dealt with by the Septennial Act as amended already.
The FTPA repealed the Septennial Act. A repealed FTPA would need to be replaced with a new equivalent of the Septennial Act . . . though almost certainly with a different name.
Until the Septennial Act it was entirely the monarch's decision when to dissolve parliament and to call an election under the royal prerogative, given the Septennial Act has been repealed if the FTPA was repealed too until new legislation was passed the decision when the next general election was held would once again return to the monarch and be entirely at the discretion of the Queen or in 4 years potentially King Charles IIIrd
There is no certainty of that and there isn't the slightest chance on earth that Parliament would repeal the FTPA without a replacement Act to replace it anyway.
The repeal of the Septennial Act was timed with the passing of the FTPA and were done in conjuction together. The same would need to occur with the repeal of the FTPA, simply repealing the FTPA without a replacement would never get through Parliament.
In the absence of statutory legislation then the royal prerogative applies so yes a replacement act would be needed at the same time as repeal or else the power would revert to the Crown
But currently there is no Royal Prerogative post repeal of FTPA.
Of course there is, the monarch is Head of State, in the absence of Parliamentary statute saying otherwise or restraining their powers then the power of the Crown fills the gap
Train numbers plummeted 95pc during lockdown and have recovered only to roughly 30pc of pre-Covid levels. Plans for flexible season tickets have been shunted into the sidings by the Treasury, industry insiders said.
Treasury officials are said to be concerned that three-day season tickets could end any hope of workers returning to the office five days a week, even once a coronavirus vaccine is found. This could leave taxpayers with an even bigger bill to run the railways.
Yes but if the SNP win a majority at Holyrood next year Boris will still be PM until 2024 and the Tories have a majority of 80 until then, so Starmer can only look at it in 2024 if he is PM from then
Head Out To Help Out, this Government simply cannot do consistent messaging
That phrase seems to be coming from the rail industry not the Government.
If you're going to class things like the rail industry as part of the Government then of course consistent messaging is impossible. We live in a free society, different groups are entitled to have different messages they want to go out.
The reason that it has been cancelled is that the usual suspects "grew" the project into a complete, GPS style, one-for-one-replacement.
Technology has moved on since GPS was designed in the 70s. There are other ways of building a satellite navigation system now.
I've yet to hear why we even need a GPS system of our own. GPS work pretty well and its never realistically going to be switched off.
Which is a part of the reason for the cancellation. The main reason is not shovelling vast amounts of money to the usual suspects on the dubious ground of "support the industrial base"
The alternative space navigation systems are quite fascinating. Currently reading a paper which suggests a navigation system that costs.... Nothing.
Grass on your neighbours WFH where possible Work from the office every day Stay in your homes Don't use public transport unless necessary Use public transport to help out Don't use the pubs Do use the pubs Don't go abroad Do go abroad
Grass on your neighbours WFH where possible Work from the office every day Stay in your homes Don't use public transport unless necessary Use public transport to help out Don't use the pubs Do use the pubs Don't go abroad Do go abroad
All at the same time
No. Most of them are not being said by the same people.
I challenge you to name a single person saying all of those at the same time. With sources preferably.
and if it's hackable by hackers, I am guessing it's possible for the owner to mislead enemy ships/aircraft/missiles as to their whereabouts.
People have being claiming that for years. Without much evidence.
The whole point of the Q code (encrypted GPS) was to -
- Make it possible to navigate when the signal is *less than the background noise*. i.e. a jammed environment. - Verify the information.
The original assumption by the US military was that the Russian system would be just a s good, so they weren't interested in degrading the "open" navigation data. That was a political thing, later.
Head Out To Help Out, this Government simply cannot do consistent messaging
That phrase seems to be coming from the rail industry not the Government.
If you're going to class things like the rail industry as part of the Government then of course consistent messaging is impossible. We live in a free society, different groups are entitled to have different messages they want to go out.
Hang on. I'm not supposed to use public transport except for school or work. It says essential journeys only in block CAPITALS on all the train boards.
Train numbers plummeted 95pc during lockdown and have recovered only to roughly 30pc of pre-Covid levels. Plans for flexible season tickets have been shunted into the sidings by the Treasury, industry insiders said.
Treasury officials are said to be concerned that three-day season tickets could end any hope of workers returning to the office five days a week, even once a coronavirus vaccine is found. This could leave taxpayers with an even bigger bill to run the railways.
God help us
There was a Transport Professor from Leeds University on 5Live the other day talking about the impact on the railway if people use it less for commuting.
She was saying that counter to what you'd imagine, pre-C-19 evidence suggests that as people commute less into the office for work and work from home more often, then overall they use the railway more than before as they have more time on their hands and are likely to travel by railway with the rest of their family for leisure reasons.
Pre-C-19 two thirds of trips on the railway were not work related journeys according to what she said.
Post vaccine, if there is more staycations, maybe the railway will have the greatest demand ever, we simply don't know and no one can reliably predict what the state of the railways will be in 1 year let alone 10 - 20 years which is the time span you need to plan for on the railway.
Head Out To Help Out, this Government simply cannot do consistent messaging
That phrase seems to be coming from the rail industry not the Government.
If you're going to class things like the rail industry as part of the Government then of course consistent messaging is impossible. We live in a free society, different groups are entitled to have different messages they want to go out.
Hang on. I'm not supposed to use public transport except for school or work. It says essential journeys only in block CAPITALS on all the train boards.
Of course that is policy.
Some in the rail industry want policy changing, for their own selfish reasons. That doesn't make it policy.
The reason that it has been cancelled is that the usual suspects "grew" the project into a complete, GPS style, one-for-one-replacement.
Technology has moved on since GPS was designed in the 70s. There are other ways of building a satellite navigation system now.
I've yet to hear why we even need a GPS system of our own. GPS work pretty well and its never realistically going to be switched off.
GPS is now highly susceptible to countermeasures. That's why the new US GPS M-Code (L1, 1575.42 MHz) and L2, 1227.60 MHz) has anti-spoofing and blue-on-blue jamming features. M-Code will allow suppression of the commercial signal but still allow M-Code users to generate position without reference to the legacy C/A and P(Y) signals. So in the future we are going to see a lot more GPS suppression and military users will get as much location information as the US feel likes giving them.
This will have all been thought through in detail by Johnson and a structured, technically credible plan will be put in place to restore this vital sovereign capability. HAHAHA.
Yes but his supporters want to hear from him again.
The problem Biden has is his campaign is all online at the moment, TV ads or press conferences, no rallies or door to door canvassing, fair enough he is applying the rules strictly, Trump however has just held big rallies in Wisconsin, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Nevada, all key swing states and is firing up his supporters and Trump campaigners are now going door to door to identify their vote to get them out on election day.
On paper Biden still leads, just as Hillary's did in 2016 but his campaign lacks the energy of the Trump campaign, another similarity of the Hillary campaign with the Biden campaign. Trump may not be Obama but his supporters are fired up as Obama's were in 2012, Biden's campaign is more like that of Romney, his vote is more against the President than with much enthusiasm for him
Does The Telegraph imagine that anyone on the planet would find that remotely reassuring?
The Telegraph has 522,000 subscribers. Say a million adults in the UK (Husbands and wives etc) read it (Some subs will be abroad). There are 32 million UK voters, anything at all published in there has a very niche audience.
You think being a vegetarian makes you a legend? That a prospective PM saying eating meat is wrong for the planet is the right thing to do or a vote winner?
This is worse than him kneeling. Awful, absolutely awful.
You think being a vegetarian makes you a legend? That a prospective PM saying eating meat is wrong for the planet is the right thing to do or a vote winner?
This is worse than him kneeling. Awful, absolutely awful.
There's nothing wrong with being a vegetarian. He wasn't trying to convince others to be one, he was saying it was very difficult because he misses bacon sandwiches and curry. That's relatable
Train numbers plummeted 95pc during lockdown and have recovered only to roughly 30pc of pre-Covid levels. Plans for flexible season tickets have been shunted into the sidings by the Treasury, industry insiders said.
Treasury officials are said to be concerned that three-day season tickets could end any hope of workers returning to the office five days a week, even once a coronavirus vaccine is found. This could leave taxpayers with an even bigger bill to run the railways.
God help us
Welcome to the world of the Nationalised Industry. Where the interests of
- The Treasury - Government policy - The suppliers/contractors - The workers - The users
....are looked after. In that order.
2 months to get a telephone was a *feature* of BT.
By only allowing BT to supply the physical phones, the "right" manufacturer got the job.
By not employing too many people to install phones, costs were kept down.
Additionally, by rationing phone installation, *excessive* phone usage was held down. Meaning that vast amounts of money didn't have to be *wasted* on increasing capacity in the network.
At the same time wages were good, to keep the unions happy, and the hours were.. light.
You think being a vegetarian makes you a legend? That a prospective PM saying eating meat is wrong for the planet is the right thing to do or a vote winner?
This is worse than him kneeling. Awful, absolutely awful.
One of the oddest takes on anything in the history of pb.
Thanks, Scott. I didn't know so many models were around.
I tend to use and stick with 538 because it has a strong reputation and I know and understand its quirks. One of these it tends to filter in a certain amount of subjective judgement (or common sense and intuition if you like). This may be why it is a bit less strong on Biden than most of the others which I suspect read stright across from the polls. That certainly seems to be the case with The Economist which is the other modeller I'm familiar with. I wouldn't knock it, but prefer 538.
I feel like the exercise is mildly ridiculous. It makes sense to me if you're just averaging polls, and even putting in a simple, objective adjustment like "how much do the polls typically diverge from the result" or "how much do the polls change between election day and election day -x". But once you're making a unique model for every election base based on your personal assumptions about what matters in that particular cycle, it's not clear to me why this is more useful than making a personal projection which also includes new information that wasn't available when you made the model. If we trust a forecaster's subjective opinions about how to predict the race 90 days ahead of time, why don't we also want their subjective opinions about what they've learned since?
You think being a vegetarian makes you a legend? That a prospective PM saying eating meat is wrong for the planet is the right thing to do or a vote winner?
This is worse than him kneeling. Awful, absolutely awful.
One of the oddest takes on anything in the history of pb.
Train numbers plummeted 95pc during lockdown and have recovered only to roughly 30pc of pre-Covid levels. Plans for flexible season tickets have been shunted into the sidings by the Treasury, industry insiders said.
Treasury officials are said to be concerned that three-day season tickets could end any hope of workers returning to the office five days a week, even once a coronavirus vaccine is found. This could leave taxpayers with an even bigger bill to run the railways.
God help us
Welcome to the world of the Nationalised Industry. Where the interests of
- The Treasury - Government policy - The suppliers/contractors - The workers - The users
....are looked after. In that order.
2 months to get a telephone was a *feature* of BT.
By only allowing BT to supply the physical phones, the "right" manufacturer got the job.
By not employing too many people to install phones, costs were kept down.
Additionally, by rationing phone installation, *excessive* phone usage was held down. Meaning that vast amounts of money didn't have to be *wasted* on increasing capacity in the network.
At the same time wages were good, to keep the unions happy, and the hours were.. light.
All good. Unless you wanted a phone.
I waited 3 months to get a phone with privatised BT two years ago
You think being a vegetarian makes you a legend? That a prospective PM saying eating meat is wrong for the planet is the right thing to do or a vote winner?
This is worse than him kneeling. Awful, absolutely awful.
One of the oddest takes on anything in the history of pb.
Are we sure Sir Keir's vegetarianism isn't solely about avoiding a 'bacon sandwich' moment that plagued Ed Miliband?
You think being a vegetarian makes you a legend? That a prospective PM saying eating meat is wrong for the planet is the right thing to do or a vote winner?
This is worse than him kneeling. Awful, absolutely awful.
One of the oddest takes on anything in the history of pb.
Are we sure Sir Keir's vegetarianism isn't solely about avoiding a 'bacon sandwich' moment that plagued Ed Miliband?
I follow you on Twitter and it's like watching time travel, I see what you're going to post before you post it
You think being a vegetarian makes you a legend? That a prospective PM saying eating meat is wrong for the planet is the right thing to do or a vote winner?
This is worse than him kneeling. Awful, absolutely awful.
One of the oddest takes on anything in the history of pb.
Are we sure Sir Keir's vegetarianism isn't solely about avoiding a 'bacon sandwich' moment that plagued Ed Miliband?
I follow you on Twitter and it's like watching time travel, I see what you're going to post before you post it
Comments
Ironically it involves no thinking. Merely believing the opposite of conventional wisdom.
Which is sometimes useful and usually harmless.
But in this case actively malevolent.
Numpties like this will be the ones to entomb the economy.
If we'd wanted zero covid that was achievable but would have entailed zero foreign travel and maintaining lockdown. That was never what has been done. Don't you remember the quotation about being 'at the limits of what is possible to unlock'? That was saying we'd got R back up to 1 and unlocking more would entail cases rising again - which is what seems to have happened.
Now they can only take over 80% of the world and have a controlling stake. Great job!
The FTPA repealed the Septennial Act. A repealed FTPA would need to be replaced with a new equivalent of the Septennial Act . . . though almost certainly with a different name.
That's four full years from today.
A PM that is confident normally goes sooner. See: 1983, 1987, 2001, 2005, 2017 (confidence was hubris) and 2019.
A last minute election is because the PM has no confidence they will win even if they might. See: 1992, 1997, 2010 and 2015.
The repeal of the Septennial Act was timed with the passing of the FTPA and were done in conjuction together. The same would need to occur with the repeal of the FTPA, simply repealing the FTPA without a replacement would never get through Parliament.
So the second wind is upon us and we need to hunker down again. Inevitable really. No point bitching about it imo. Keep a lid on sickness and death until the vaccine next year (mass rollout in June) is the name of the game. Fine. But what I do NOT want to see is any "Boris" yuletide bullshit. I can quite imagine - and I'm being totally serious here - that there will be tight restrictions in place over the autumn and then lo and behold on or around 12th Dec (yuck awful date) comes a PM televised address, and there he will be, Perfidious Posh, sitting in number 10 next to a cosily decorated tree, Santa hat on, and he'll announce in that ghastly, faux-matey way he has that the People's government is suspending the Covid rules completely from the 24th to the 26th so that we can all have a proper Christmas, which we deserve on account of our hard work and sacrifice. Much cheer and relief across a nation now so denuded of critical faculties that millions start singing "For he's a jolly good fellow!" at their TV screens and the prospect immediately gets known as our “Boris Christmas”. “What are you planning for Boris Christmas?” people ask each other when they meet. “Are you going to the in laws?” If things go down like this I’ll be extremely pissed off. But otherwise, pecker up, chin chin, mustn’t grumble, and similar.
I tend to use and stick with 538 because it has a strong reputation and I know and understand its quirks. One of these it tends to filter in a certain amount of subjective judgement (or common sense and intuition if you like). This may be why it is a bit less strong on Biden than most of the others which I suspect read stright across from the polls. That certainly seems to be the case with The Economist which is the other modeller I'm familiar with. I wouldn't knock it, but prefer 538.
Democracy in action!
https://twitter.com/LeeNewton89/status/1306962498160152577
Lol
I've not seen any evidence that this is organised by "ANTIFA" encouraging violence and destruction.
I also note the Police deployed tear gas last night after being ordered not to by their Mayor. If the Police just ignore the Mayor they are out of control and causing violence themselves.
They sold some percentage of the company to an investment fund that Blackrock put some money in - and that's that. Now on the verboten list.
We don't want people going out, they need to WFH
This is new.
That's a vast area that covers a greater area I believe than Greater London alone, even if it might not be as much population.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/latest#deaths-by-region-in-england-and-wales
He said he had given up meat as “a matter of principle years ago on the basis that it wasn’t the right thing for the body and the planet”.
He said he desperately missed “bacon sandwiches, chicken curry, almost everything. This is hard work for me.”
I don't actually object to that much about Starmer yet but if he starts campaigning for vegetarianism then that'd be awful. That can f**k right off.
Lol, not again
Now everyone can see one 7 of Spades and 4 of Clubs.
Technology has moved on since GPS was designed in the 70s. There are other ways of building a satellite navigation system now.
Treasury officials are said to be concerned that three-day season tickets could end any hope of workers returning to the office five days a week, even once a coronavirus vaccine is found. This could leave taxpayers with an even bigger bill to run the railways.
God help us
I greatly appreciate the environmental benefits of oat milk, but unfortunately I can't stand the stuff.
Tom is still digging, Jesus Christ
If you're going to class things like the rail industry as part of the Government then of course consistent messaging is impossible. We live in a free society, different groups are entitled to have different messages they want to go out.
The alternative space navigation systems are quite fascinating. Currently reading a paper which suggests a navigation system that costs.... Nothing.
Grass on your neighbours
WFH where possible
Work from the office every day
Stay in your homes
Don't use public transport unless necessary
Use public transport to help out
Don't use the pubs
Do use the pubs
Don't go abroad
Do go abroad
All at the same time
Oh yes. The other Boris.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gps-is-easy-to-hack-and-the-u-s-has-no-backup/
and if it's hackable by hackers, I am guessing it's possible for the owner to mislead enemy ships/aircraft/missiles as to their whereabouts.
I challenge you to name a single person saying all of those at the same time. With sources preferably.
Straight savage
The whole point of the Q code (encrypted GPS) was to -
- Make it possible to navigate when the signal is *less than the background noise*. i.e. a jammed environment.
- Verify the information.
The original assumption by the US military was that the Russian system would be just a s good, so they weren't interested in degrading the "open" navigation data. That was a political thing, later.
It says essential journeys only in block CAPITALS on all the train boards.
She was saying that counter to what you'd imagine, pre-C-19 evidence suggests that as people commute less into the office for work and work from home more often, then overall they use the railway more than before as they have more time on their hands and are likely to travel by railway with the rest of their family for leisure reasons.
Pre-C-19 two thirds of trips on the railway were not work related journeys according to what she said.
Post vaccine, if there is more staycations, maybe the railway will have the greatest demand ever, we simply don't know and no one can reliably predict what the state of the railways will be in 1 year let alone 10 - 20 years which is the time span you need to plan for on the railway.
Some in the rail industry want policy changing, for their own selfish reasons. That doesn't make it policy.
This will have all been thought through in detail by Johnson and a structured, technically credible plan will be put in place to restore this vital sovereign capability. HAHAHA.
What a legend
The problem Biden has is his campaign is all online at the moment, TV ads or press conferences, no rallies or door to door canvassing, fair enough he is applying the rules strictly, Trump however has just held big rallies in Wisconsin, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Nevada, all key swing states and is firing up his supporters and Trump campaigners are now going door to door to identify their vote to get them out on election day.
On paper Biden still leads, just as Hillary's did in 2016 but his campaign lacks the energy of the Trump campaign, another similarity of the Hillary campaign with the Biden campaign. Trump may not be Obama but his supporters are fired up as Obama's were in 2012, Biden's campaign is more like that of Romney, his vote is more against the President than with much enthusiasm for him
This is worse than him kneeling. Awful, absolutely awful.
He wins elections, then it is evidently clear he doesn't have a clue.
The Tories are out of ideas.
Corruption.
- The Treasury
- Government policy
- The suppliers/contractors
- The workers
- The users
....are looked after. In that order.
2 months to get a telephone was a *feature* of BT.
By only allowing BT to supply the physical phones, the "right" manufacturer got the job.
By not employing too many people to install phones, costs were kept down.
Additionally, by rationing phone installation, *excessive* phone usage was held down. Meaning that vast amounts of money didn't have to be *wasted* on increasing capacity in the network.
At the same time wages were good, to keep the unions happy, and the hours were.. light.
All good. Unless you wanted a phone.
For that matter the LibDems have had no ideas either.
Now there are a few possible ideas - UBI and drugs legalisation for example - but few politicians seem interested.
FTTP
Renewables
Discuss.