Howdy, Stranger!

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

Tories forever? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,167
edited April 2021 in General
imageTories forever? – politicalbetting.com

There used to be such a thing in politics as the pendulum. Rather like its physical counterpart, it appears to have gone out of fashion. In fact, there were two pendulums operating simultaneously, one between general elections and one across them.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,724
    First
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    Deuxieme
  • NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 1,758
    One more than the one before.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Deuxieme

    comme les socialistes
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,052
    Labour needs what oppositions always need - a charismatic leader and some really bad government screwups.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,724
    Labour have had four successive duff leaders who failed to grab the imagination of enough voters All four have a lack of charisma. Brown especially . Until they elect someone who is like Blair or the Tories commit hari kari, I cannot see Labour getting a majority. SKS will not win because as he says he knows his own mind, but that is all he know. Voters are unimpressed with Mr Wishy-Washy.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited April 2021
    The best possible outcome in 2024 for Labour is a Hung Parliament. We know that, they know that. They aren’t winning a majority.

    So the question then becomes, how does Labour get a Hung Parliament? Well two ways, try and get above 40% again in the right seats. Emphasis on the right seats there.

    Second, try and get the Tory vote base to split and return to results more like 2005 to 2015. Labour would probably then not need to go much higher than 40% again in the right seats.

    As I’ve said many times, the big problem for Labour right now is how weak the Lib Dems are. Starmer should really be the ideal candidate for them to do well, as I recall he’s very popular with their voters. That should encourage tactical voting and a strong Lib Dem turnout in seats like Guildford, Winchester. Seats in the South that probably only matter at the margins.

    Right now Labour seems doomed. But then it seemed doomed after 2019, then it seemed on course to do well just a few months ago. Now it is doomed again.

    What I will say is that this isn’t going to be plain sailing for the Tories. Things will go wrong as they already have, some people will get annoyed. The Government will at some point become unpopular. This always happens.

    The question is how Starmer capitalises on that. And right now he has not been able to. I think to be fair that’s not his fault, see the focus groups that say he opposes too much despite not really opposing much at all. The next year is going to be crucial for him.

    Finally, Labour needs a big idea. A contrast with the Tories that makes people stand up and take notice. Attlee had it, Wilson had it. Blair had it. Does Starmer?
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 7,152
    edited April 2021
    I think this is a bit of a silly article.

    It's true the Conservatives have been in office since 2010, and currently look to have a good chance of re-election in a couple of years. That's clearly a good run.

    It's not unprecedented - they've had more time in office than Labour over the past century (so an odd sort of pendulum) and had 18 years in office to 1997. Only one of the recent elections has been convincing - two were hung Parliaments, one a wafer thin majority. They've had plenty of shaky moments, and were assisted by Labour leadership woes.

    So, if I were a Conservative, I'd be happy about the current situation, but it really doesn't represent some kind of new paradigm.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    First under AV.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,761
    Economic issue may reassert themselves massively in the next few years. It could all look very different by 2024.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,052

    I think this is a bit of a silly article.

    It's true the Conservatives have been in office since 2010, and currently look to have a good chance of re-election in a couple of years. That's clearly a good run.

    It's not unprecedented - they've had more time in office than Labour over the past century (so an odd sort of pendulum) and had 18 years in office to 1997. Only one of the recent elections has been convincing - two were hung Parliaments, one a wafer thin majority. They've had plenty of shaky moments, and were assisted by Labour leadership woes.

    So, if I were a Conservative, I'd be happy about the current situation, but it really doesn't represent some kind of new paradigm.

    I agree with that. Also, of their four election victories since 2010, only one was really decisive, in the way that general election victories were in the 80s, 90s and 00s. Cameron couldn't even get a majority against the least popular PM ever ffs.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,724
    ydoethur said:

    First under AV.

    A terminological inexactitude so early in the day....
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,533
    edited April 2021
    An excellent analysis. One question: Anything like 'normal' feels a long time ago. Since Blair/Brown we have had: Coalition, IndyRef, an apparently 'normal' Tory win in 2015 followed at once by Jezza and the abnormal Brexit (still running and running like the Mousetrap), the most abnormal election for years in 2017, the Boris takeover, a third GE in short order in 2019 with abnormal results against Labour, followed by pandemic (another Mousetrap?) and the permanent threat of separation from Scotland.

    None of this, when taken together, has any semblance of normality.

    The question is this; is this the way the future feels, or will boring good old normality return, in which two modest and slightly competent parties fight it out? Is the present climate in nation and politics a big or a feature. If it is a feature, it is a Black Swan event, slowly unfolding. if it is a bug, it would be rather nice if it ended soon.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    The interesting thing is, the pendulum very much swung to Labour in the 2010-2015 parliament. Looking back, it was a mistake for Ed Miliband to resign.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    Interesting article. My favourite part is one rather brief sentence : "Brexit is a proxy rather than an ideological starting point".
    Every attempt to understand the current state of British politics ought to start with thia line.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,448
    Quincel said:

    On the one hand, I agree with a lot of the logic in this header. On the other hand, I'm very aware that this is the sort of thing which is often said just before a long-standing government spectacularly collapses and we all laugh about it later.

    Good morning everybody.

    What a sensible post to start the thread. Never say never.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595
    Wot, Buggins - dead?

    Another string to Boris' bow.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,800
    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,595
    The government both has to screw up, and the Opposition need to look like a government in waiting.

    Last time the government screwed up, in 2018 and early 2019, the same party managed to reinvent itself with a new leader, and the Opposition never got a look-in.
  • Right now we are at very high Tory popularity. I sound like I’m making excavates but it’s true. They’ve done a great job on the vaccines - and anyone saying otherwise is just here to play football - and we’re coming out of lockdown. They deserve praise for that.

    Therefore if we sail to 2024 with nothing bad coming then they’ll win again. I’d even bet on a win.

    But is that realistic? We’ve thrown around a lot of money, we’re in an economic hole and I am sceptical that we will recover back to where we were. People will lose their jobs, businesses will collapse. It’s not going to be good for some. The question is, how many people will be impacted?

    Economics will be what sinks the Tories. If it does.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,052

    Quincel said:

    On the one hand, I agree with a lot of the logic in this header. On the other hand, I'm very aware that this is the sort of thing which is often said just before a long-standing government spectacularly collapses and we all laugh about it later.

    Good morning everybody.

    What a sensible post to start the thread. Never say never.
    Yes, the last time I remember reading so many articles like this was the summer of 1992.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176

    Right now we are at very high Tory popularity. I sound like I’m making excavates but it’s true. They’ve done a great job on the vaccines - and anyone saying otherwise is just here to play football - and we’re coming out of lockdown. They deserve praise for that.

    Therefore if we sail to 2024 with nothing bad coming then they’ll win again. I’d even bet on a win.

    But is that realistic? We’ve thrown around a lot of money, we’re in an economic hole and I am sceptical that we will recover back to where we were. People will lose their jobs, businesses will collapse. It’s not going to be good for some. The question is, how many people will be impacted?

    Economics will be what sinks the Tories. If it does.

    One tricky thing facing the government is the fact that there’s not much inflation coming through. Labour don’t care about sound money so it’s safe to assume that they’ll position themselves on the spend spend spend side of the debate.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595
    I think we have already climbed Peak Starmer...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,761
    German sounds grim:

    "Lothar Wieler, head of the Robert Koch Institute, gave a shocking account of developments on Thursday, warning that the picture was now worse than at the peak of the deadly second wave. Intensive care wards are hitting saturation in several regions. Ecmo machines for oxygen are running short."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/04/16/germany-warns-lasting-economic-damage-covid-cases-spin-control/
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,724

    Right now we are at very high Tory popularity. I sound like I’m making excavates but it’s true. They’ve done a great job on the vaccines - and anyone saying otherwise is just here to play football - and we’re coming out of lockdown. They deserve praise for that.

    Therefore if we sail to 2024 with nothing bad coming then they’ll win again. I’d even bet on a win.

    But is that realistic? We’ve thrown around a lot of money, we’re in an economic hole and I am sceptical that we will recover back to where we were. People will lose their jobs, businesses will collapse. It’s not going to be good for some. The question is, how many people will be impacted?

    Economics will be what sinks the Tories. If it does.

    I see you are using predictive text.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,761

    Right now we are at very high Tory popularity. I sound like I’m making excavates but it’s true. They’ve done a great job on the vaccines - and anyone saying otherwise is just here to play football - and we’re coming out of lockdown. They deserve praise for that.

    Therefore if we sail to 2024 with nothing bad coming then they’ll win again. I’d even bet on a win.

    But is that realistic? We’ve thrown around a lot of money, we’re in an economic hole and I am sceptical that we will recover back to where we were. People will lose their jobs, businesses will collapse. It’s not going to be good for some. The question is, how many people will be impacted?

    Economics will be what sinks the Tories. If it does.

    I agree on last point.

    Or, Johnson's refusal to do something about cross border travel results in the vaccine miracle becoming redundant as a vaccine escape variant from abroad hits us. Lockdown again in early autumn and next winter thanks to that kind of f off means all bets off for Johnson imho. The public will want blood.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,724

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    A well constructed and thoughtful header which will herald a day of Starmer is cr*p posts. He is not such, he is merely mediocre

    A day on the wife's one man, digging for victory, chain gang beckons.

    All our current politicians are mediocre.

    It’s just the mediocrities in government- Johnson, Sturgeon, Drakeford - have an advantage over the mediocrities who are not - Starmer, Ross, Davies.

    If they keep getting accused of committing criminal acts this advantage may be reduced, of course.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856
    edited April 2021
    I have made this point before but as a child I saw the government change pretty regularly. 64 Wilson, 70 Heath, 74 Wilson again, 79 Thatcher.

    The pattern since then has been very different. 97 Blair, 2010 Cameron and that's it. 2 changes of government in 24 years with another change not looking particularly imminent. Why is this? Clearly incumbency has become an enormous advantage. In Scotland too we have had the same party in power for 14 years and they will clearly be the next government whatever the balance on a majority will be. Being in government, having the ability to bribe the electorate and dominate the airways seems an almost impossible advantage now.

    Almost, but not quite. In 97 Blair won by a landslide, a tired, arrogant, divided government shown to be economically incompetent by black Wednesday got show the door emphatically. In 2010 a tired, arrogant divided government shown to be economically incompetent by the GFC got shown the door. It was almost as emphatic but Cameron started a long way behind where Blair was in 97.

    So to overcome the advantage of incumbency we need something dramatic that bears directly on the performance of the government and a perceived to be competent alternative. We live in dramatic times but so far Boris's government is not wearing the consequences of the pandemic, quite the reverse, and Brexit is an issue for sad obsessives and no one else. That makes this government relatively safe. Of course if the short term boom of bounce back is followed by a severe recession in 2024 that might change but 92 showed that even a severe recession is not enough on its own.

    And then there is the perceived to be competent alternative. This is not just the leader its the team. Blair had Brown, Cameron had Osborne, both powerful figures in their own right. Starmer needs a better team to help give himself more credibility. And he needs to hope.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595
    moonshine said:
    Most of our tech for the past 60-70 years has come from alien reverse engineering since Roswell. (Best one I heard was Velcro!)

    And now, the centre of hi-tech isn't Silicon Valley, it is under the Martian surface. Says a bloke who should know (or who has gone bat-shit crazy.)

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/weird-news/former-israeli-space-security-chief-says-extraterrestrials-exist-trump-knows-n1250333
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,800
    Mr. Root, yes. Thus proving Francis Urquhart's point that nothing lasts forever.

    As an aside, the previous periods of party governance were both between one and two decades. If you count the Coalition as Conservative, we're in that window now.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,724

    A well constructed and thoughtful header which will herald a day of Starmer is cr*p posts. He is not such, he is merely mediocre

    A day on the wife's one man, digging for victory, chain gang beckons.

    He is wishy-washy.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,533
    Cookie said:

    Interesting article. My favourite part is one rather brief sentence : "Brexit is a proxy rather than an ideological starting point".
    Every attempt to understand the current state of British politics ought to start with thia line.

    True. But there is an important add on: In reality a decent implementation of Brexit - a process taking years and has hardly started - must be the central long term general political concern. At the moment there is precisely one party and one only which has the slightest claim to credibility when it comes to actually supporting the principle of it (though of course even most Tory big names in recent history have always been against it).

    The only alternative to the Tories is a rainbow alliance with Labour in the lead. At the next election (sooner rather than later I suspect) it will become obvious that and alliance of Lab, LD, PC, SNP and Green are not the obvious grouping for an enthusiastic continuation of Brexit policy. Labour will say the right things of course but the level of belief is its credibility will be nil. Even lower for all other parties.

    Unless there is a solution to this electoral conundrum no sort of multi party normality can prevail. No other possible government has its heart in Brexit. Labour show no sign of solving it yet.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Right now we are at very high Tory popularity. I sound like I’m making excavates but it’s true. They’ve done a great job on the vaccines - and anyone saying otherwise is just here to play football - and we’re coming out of lockdown. They deserve praise for that.

    Therefore if we sail to 2024 with nothing bad coming then they’ll win again. I’d even bet on a win.

    But is that realistic? We’ve thrown around a lot of money, we’re in an economic hole and I am sceptical that we will recover back to where we were. People will lose their jobs, businesses will collapse. It’s not going to be good for some. The question is, how many people will be impacted?

    Economics will be what sinks the Tories. If it does.

    I see you are using predictive text.
    It dug a hole for him :smile:
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,098
    edited April 2021
    It should be pointed out that the latest Survation yesterday had Labour on 35%, just 1% behind the 36% Tory voteshare Cameron got in 2010.

    We are now 11 years into this Tory government and the next general election in 2024 will be after 14 years of the Tories in power, so closest to 2010 which was held after 13 years of Labour in power and remember Cameron only got in then in a hung parliament with LD support, not an overall majority.

    1997 is not a valid comparison as that was after 18 years of the Tories in power ie the equivalent would be Starmer as Kinnock in 1992 and making a few gains in 2024 but not enough to win and then being replaced by a Blair like figure who won a landslide in 2029 after 19 years of the Tories in power. Kinnock's Labour voteshare in 1992 of 34% is pretty close to Starmer's average Labour score now so he is actually about par for where he should be.

    Similarly when Wilson got in in 1964 after 13 years of Tory rule it was with a majority of just 4 and thanks to the support of Scottish and Welsh MPs as Home won a majority in England, a scenario more likely for Starmer in 2024 than a Blair 1997 rehash
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,312

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Ditto Italy - and it collapsed spectacularly because of corruption scandals - Operazione Mani Pulite.

    Though, sadly and ironically enough, that led to the election of one of the most venal leaders Italy has ever had. So even if a regime falls, there is no guarantee that what will replace it will be any better.

    My very first case as an in-house investigator related to one of the cases brought by Italian magistrates against various politicians. It involved a Sicilian businessman (concrete was his business), a Swiss bank, an Italian state-owned enterprise and 2 apparently unsuspecting and naive US banks. What fun that was. The main lesson it taught me is that there is nothing people won't believe if they badly want it to be true.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,378
    ydoethur said:

    A well constructed and thoughtful header which will herald a day of Starmer is cr*p posts. He is not such, he is merely mediocre

    A day on the wife's one man, digging for victory, chain gang beckons.

    All our current politicians are mediocre.

    It’s just the mediocrities in government- Johnson, Sturgeon, Drakeford - have an advantage over the mediocrities who are not - Starmer, Ross, Davies.

    If they keep getting accused of committing criminal acts this advantage may be reduced, of course.
    For all Johnson, Sturgeon and Drakeford's obvious shortcomings, Davies ratchets mediocrity down many, many notches.

    Anyway, turf to remove, Terram sheeting to be laid, three hundredweight of slate chippings to be shovelled and an ageing back to be broken. I must off.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,378
    edited April 2021

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Please, not fifty years of Johnson. I'll be dead in twenty and I don't want that duplicitous b****** ruining my twilight years.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    edited April 2021

    I think this is a bit of a silly article.

    It's true the Conservatives have been in office since 2010, and currently look to have a good chance of re-election in a couple of years. That's clearly a good run.

    It's not unprecedented - they've had more time in office than Labour over the past century (so an odd sort of pendulum) and had 18 years in office to 1997. Only one of the recent elections has been convincing - two were hung Parliaments, one a wafer thin majority. They've had plenty of shaky moments, and were assisted by Labour leadership woes.

    So, if I were a Conservative, I'd be happy about the current situation, but it really doesn't represent some kind of new paradigm.

    And the article skips over the non-negligible possibilities of serious economic disruption or collapse, the clown's seemingly endless luck running out with some scandal or other, or some other black swan event. Note that the Arcuri affair means Johnson can't escape should the sleaze story gather momentum.

    It's also the case that, while Labour is miles away from being able to form a majority which would require an earthquake of a swing, the Tories aren't all that far from losing their majority, in terms of required swing. Both remove the Tories from office.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,612
    edited April 2021
    tlg86 said:

    The interesting thing is, the pendulum very much swung to Labour in the 2010-2015 parliament. Looking back, it was a mistake for Ed Miliband to resign.

    EdM had opinion poll leads up to 15%.

    But in the local elections it was a different story:

    2011 Con 38% Lab 37%
    2012 Lab 39% Con 33%
    2013 Lab 29% Con 26%
    2014 Lab 31% Con 30%

    Compare with the leads the Conservatives had in the local elections before 2010:

    2006 Con 39% Lab 26%
    2007 Con 40% Lab 26%
    2008 Con 43% Lab 24%
    2009 Con 35% Lab 22%

    The Conservatives had 'broken through' although 2009 did suggest it was more a desire to get rid of Labour and that there was still uncertainty about the Conservatives.

    Whereas EdM's Labour achieved a couple of Kinnock style performances in 2011-2 and then sank back into hopes about hung parliaments.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    It would be interesting to see that chart on an aggregate rolling basis
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,724
    ydoethur said:

    Right now we are at very high Tory popularity. I sound like I’m making excavates but it’s true. They’ve done a great job on the vaccines - and anyone saying otherwise is just here to play football - and we’re coming out of lockdown. They deserve praise for that.

    Therefore if we sail to 2024 with nothing bad coming then they’ll win again. I’d even bet on a win.

    But is that realistic? We’ve thrown around a lot of money, we’re in an economic hole and I am sceptical that we will recover back to where we were. People will lose their jobs, businesses will collapse. It’s not going to be good for some. The question is, how many people will be impacted?

    Economics will be what sinks the Tories. If it does.

    I see you are using predictive text.
    It dug a hole for him :smile:
    Lol
    I had terrible trouble with the site until I started posting via Vanilla. I am not a good typist at the best of times but hasty posting and an inability to correct once posted was my downfall.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Right now we are at very high Tory popularity. I sound like I’m making excavates but it’s true. They’ve done a great job on the vaccines - and anyone saying otherwise is just here to play football - and we’re coming out of lockdown. They deserve praise for that.

    Therefore if we sail to 2024 with nothing bad coming then they’ll win again. I’d even bet on a win.

    But is that realistic? We’ve thrown around a lot of money, we’re in an economic hole and I am sceptical that we will recover back to where we were. People will lose their jobs, businesses will collapse. It’s not going to be good for some. The question is, how many people will be impacted?

    Economics will be what sinks the Tories. If it does.

    Making excavates? Is that the same a digging a hole for yourself?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,217
    edited April 2021
    An interesting piece - thanks.

    Off to trim the some bushes now, subject to birds in their little nests.

    I take it that whoever was boasting about being a drunk in control of a car over a distance he could have walked in 2 minutes was pissed out of his brain yesterday evening. Some of us know people who are in wheelchairs because of bastards who drove whilst drunk.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595
    Cyclefree said:

    Anyway, this evening I am venturing out to one of the best pub/eateries in the Lakes for dinner after a pre-dinner walk in the area. The mohair blankets and hot water bottles have already been packed in the car. The day looks gorgeous but there is not much sun up a hillside at 7:30 pm.

    I am looking forward to it. It will be nice to do something vaguely normal for a change.

    I hope it is a wonderful evening out, to cap off an excellent day. Damn, they've been in short supply for you!
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,494
    It feels like to me that the labour party is currently in the same situation it was in 1988. They have a competent leader but not one who is going to inspire people to switch. The lack of vision for what they want to do is their biggest problem. You know what the Tories stand for and what they are going to do, even if you don't agree with it.

    It took the 1987 defeat to make Labour properly change their mindset and move them towards a credible alternative government but with so much ground to make up it took them two more elections to win. Something similar happened after 2005 for the Tories (but the change started with crowning Michael Howard).

    The one thing that could change everything is a Scottish vote for independence. Will voters abandon the Tories? Will Labour be able to convince people that they will be able to negotiate firmly?

    It's worth noting that since 1955 Labour has only won a majority of seats in England 4 times. Scottish independence could make it more likely that there's a (more) permanent Tory majority,
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Please, not fifty years of Johnson. I'll be dead in twenty and I don't want that duplicitous b****** ruining my twilight years.
    Hate to break it to you, but it was suggested to me the other day by an MP that having go the top job, he now has Longest. Ever. PM. as his target....
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    The Indian coronavirus mutation could “scupper” the UK’s march to freedom, a leading scientist has warned, despite the lockdown and vaccine programme leading to cases falling to a seven-month low.

    Covid-19 infections across the UK dropped to the lowest level since the autumn, according to the latest figures.

    But a professor of immunology has called for Britain to be on its guard against a third wave after a possible vaccine-busting mutation was recorded in England and Scotland.

    Public Health England (PHE) reported that 77 cases of the B.1.617 variant, which was first discovered in India, have been found.

    Imperial College’s Danny Altmann said that as a result, those arriving into the country from India should be subject to a hotel quarantine if the UK is to shut out variants that could set back the Prime Minister’s lockdown easing plans.

    But despite the warnings, Downing Street has insisted Boris Johnson’s trip to India later this month - his first major international visit since securing a Brexit trade deal with Brussels - will go ahead.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    The ruling party is even more successful than that; I went back and checked the records.

    The Liberal Democratic Party first won a general election in Japan in 1958, and then won either an outright majority or something reasonably close to it in every single subsequent election until it was swept from power in 2009, 51 years later.

    The LDP then won the next election, in 2012, with a substantial majority over a hopelessly fragmented opposition, and normal service was resumed. That makes 60 out of the last 63 years as the party of government, and counting.

    Prolonged one party rule in a plural, democratic system is atypical, but possible. There is no reason to suppose that the UK is immune to this.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,749

    moonshine said:
    Most of our tech for the past 60-70 years has come from alien reverse engineering since Roswell. (Best one I heard was Velcro!)

    And now, the centre of hi-tech isn't Silicon Valley, it is under the Martian surface. Says a bloke who should know (or who has gone bat-shit crazy.)

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/weird-news/former-israeli-space-security-chief-says-extraterrestrials-exist-trump-knows-n1250333
    Aliens using Velcro sounds a bit like cosmonauts using pencils when NASA was inventing the space pen.

    The American officials (and ex officials) have been quite careful not to sound too outlandish. They’re basically saying “we are seeing things that are not ours, they interfere with our military operations, in a lot of cases they defy our understanding of materials science and physics itself, and we have a lot of multi point evidence backing it up. We need insight on what these things are”.

    A multi decades campaign of public ridicule on the subject has meant people have been too scared to engage with it. At least in America, that’s now changing. We’ve yet to catch up here, somewhere between 2-3 years behind the process in America I’d say.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,201
    edited April 2021
    Is all this talk of "vaccine busting" variants actually the fact they have a higher base r0 so thus require more vaccine coverage/efficacy to achieve herd immunity ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Please, not fifty years of Johnson. I'll be dead in twenty and I don't want that duplicitous b****** ruining my twilight years.
    Hate to break it to you, but it was suggested to me the other day by an MP that having go the top job, he now has Longest. Ever. PM. as his target....
    23 years simply ain’t gonna happen. No matter what he thinks or wishes.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595
    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:
    Most of our tech for the past 60-70 years has come from alien reverse engineering since Roswell. (Best one I heard was Velcro!)

    And now, the centre of hi-tech isn't Silicon Valley, it is under the Martian surface. Says a bloke who should know (or who has gone bat-shit crazy.)

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/weird-news/former-israeli-space-security-chief-says-extraterrestrials-exist-trump-knows-n1250333
    Aliens using Velcro sounds a bit like cosmonauts using pencils when NASA was inventing the space pen.

    The American officials (and ex officials) have been quite careful not to sound too outlandish. They’re basically saying “we are seeing things that are not ours, they interfere with our military operations, in a lot of cases they defy our understanding of materials science and physics itself, and we have a lot of multi point evidence backing it up. We need insight on what these things are”.

    A multi decades campaign of public ridicule on the subject has meant people have been too scared to engage with it. At least in America, that’s now changing. We’ve yet to catch up here, somewhere between 2-3 years behind the process in America I’d say.
    Looking at current Earth politics would be rather fascinating if it was the case that Russia, China, the EU were excluded from a US-Alien technology alliance....
  • The piece that still resonates with me was in the Spectator last week. Labour are the AND party - to support them you have to support this AND this AND this AND this and any dissent on any of them makes you a traitor. The Tories are the OR party - to support them you can support this OR this OR this and if you don't like most policies but vote for them for this one, welcome to the party!

    There is no way that a party as inept as the current Tories can maintain their current level of support. Punters generally want competent fair government and despite the pox and Brexit making many voters suspend this, it won't last. However I don't put it past the Tories to reinvent themselves with a new leader leading a "new" government.

    Then we have Labour. Without significant seats won in Scotland there is no route to a majority. Without a wholesale rethink of how to speak to people they aren't going to win back seats in the former red wall. Starmer isn't really the problem, the party is. A Blair would lead from the front, inspire the centre and build an unstoppable coalition of voters. I just don't see that Labour have anyone of that calibre to choose from...
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    spudgfsh said:

    It feels like to me that the labour party is currently in the same situation it was in 1988. They have a competent leader but not one who is going to inspire people to switch. The lack of vision for what they want to do is their biggest problem. You know what the Tories stand for and what they are going to do, even if you don't agree with it.

    It took the 1987 defeat to make Labour properly change their mindset and move them towards a credible alternative government but with so much ground to make up it took them two more elections to win. Something similar happened after 2005 for the Tories (but the change started with crowning Michael Howard).

    The one thing that could change everything is a Scottish vote for independence. Will voters abandon the Tories? Will Labour be able to convince people that they will be able to negotiate firmly?

    It's worth noting that since 1955 Labour has only won a majority of seats in England 4 times. Scottish independence could make it more likely that there's a (more) permanent Tory majority,

    Scottish secession is a threat to Boris Johnson's position and his legacy, which is why he won't grant a Section 30 order.

    It's no threat at all to the position of the Conservatives in England. The end of the Union would upset some of the Tory voter coalition, but can we see any significant proportion of it abandoning the party over it? I think not.

    As you say, if Scotland fell off tomorrow, it would only make the position of the Conservative Party south of the border much more secure. It would leave the Government with 359 of the remaining 591 MPs, boosting its majority to 127 seats.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595

    The piece that still resonates with me was in the Spectator last week. Labour are the AND party - to support them you have to support this AND this AND this AND this and any dissent on any of them makes you a traitor. The Tories are the OR party - to support them you can support this OR this OR this and if you don't like most policies but vote for them for this one, welcome to the party!

    There is no way that a party as inept as the current Tories can maintain their current level of support. Punters generally want competent fair government and despite the pox and Brexit making many voters suspend this, it won't last. However I don't put it past the Tories to reinvent themselves with a new leader leading a "new" government.

    Then we have Labour. Without significant seats won in Scotland there is no route to a majority. Without a wholesale rethink of how to speak to people they aren't going to win back seats in the former red wall. Starmer isn't really the problem, the party is. A Blair would lead from the front, inspire the centre and build an unstoppable coalition of voters. I just don't see that Labour have anyone of that calibre to choose from...

    So we have the Tories who simply HAVE to lose seats, but Labour who can't actually win them off them - and LibDem's so wedded to the EU they can't either.

    New Party time?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,800
    edited April 2021
    Mr. Mark, what was the PB party called?

    The Dave Party? I forget.

    Edited extra bit: no, it was the Patrick Party!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868

    The piece that still resonates with me was in the Spectator last week. Labour are the AND party - to support them you have to support this AND this AND this AND this and any dissent on any of them makes you a traitor. The Tories are the OR party - to support them you can support this OR this OR this and if you don't like most policies but vote for them for this one, welcome to the party!

    There is no way that a party as inept as the current Tories can maintain their current level of support. Punters generally want competent fair government and despite the pox and Brexit making many voters suspend this, it won't last. However I don't put it past the Tories to reinvent themselves with a new leader leading a "new" government.

    Then we have Labour. Without significant seats won in Scotland there is no route to a majority. Without a wholesale rethink of how to speak to people they aren't going to win back seats in the former red wall. Starmer isn't really the problem, the party is. A Blair would lead from the front, inspire the centre and build an unstoppable coalition of voters. I just don't see that Labour have anyone of that calibre to choose from...

    So we have the Tories who simply HAVE to lose seats, but Labour who can't actually win them off them - and LibDem's so wedded to the EU they can't either.

    New Party time?
    You're in fine trolling mood this morning. First offering us the clown as PM for decades to come. Then the US allying with aliens. Now suggesting ChangeUK Two.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595
    ydoethur said:

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Please, not fifty years of Johnson. I'll be dead in twenty and I don't want that duplicitous b****** ruining my twilight years.
    Hate to break it to you, but it was suggested to me the other day by an MP that having go the top job, he now has Longest. Ever. PM. as his target....
    23 years simply ain’t gonna happen. No matter what he thinks or wishes.
    On the plus side, it would see off any chance of PM Gove.....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,098
    edited April 2021

    spudgfsh said:

    It feels like to me that the labour party is currently in the same situation it was in 1988. They have a competent leader but not one who is going to inspire people to switch. The lack of vision for what they want to do is their biggest problem. You know what the Tories stand for and what they are going to do, even if you don't agree with it.

    It took the 1987 defeat to make Labour properly change their mindset and move them towards a credible alternative government but with so much ground to make up it took them two more elections to win. Something similar happened after 2005 for the Tories (but the change started with crowning Michael Howard).

    The one thing that could change everything is a Scottish vote for independence. Will voters abandon the Tories? Will Labour be able to convince people that they will be able to negotiate firmly?

    It's worth noting that since 1955 Labour has only won a majority of seats in England 4 times. Scottish independence could make it more likely that there's a (more) permanent Tory majority,

    Scottish secession is a threat to Boris Johnson's position and his legacy, which is why he won't grant a Section 30 order.

    It's no threat at all to the position of the Conservatives in England. The end of the Union would upset some of the Tory voter coalition, but can we see any significant proportion of it abandoning the party over it? I think not.

    As you say, if Scotland fell off tomorrow, it would only make the position of the Conservative Party south of the border much more secure. It would leave the Government with 359 of the remaining 591 MPs, boosting its majority to 127 seats.
    Scottish secession would as you correctly say mean Boris had to resign having lost Scotland, which is why he will never grant a legal indyref2.

    However if it ever happened it would be the end of the Conservative and Unionist Party anyway, they would become the English National Party instead ie the English equivalent of the Scottish National Party and to ensure no compromise with the SNP in Scexit talks, Labour would be out of power for another generation in both England and Scotland and would probably have to reinvent itself in Wales as the Welsh Nationalist Party to see off a Plaid resurgence there
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,595
    spudgfsh said:

    It feels like to me that the labour party is currently in the same situation it was in 1988. They have a competent leader but not one who is going to inspire people to switch. The lack of vision for what they want to do is their biggest problem. You know what the Tories stand for and what they are going to do, even if you don't agree with it.

    It took the 1987 defeat to make Labour properly change their mindset and move them towards a credible alternative government but with so much ground to make up it took them two more elections to win. Something similar happened after 2005 for the Tories (but the change started with crowning Michael Howard).

    The one thing that could change everything is a Scottish vote for independence. Will voters abandon the Tories? Will Labour be able to convince people that they will be able to negotiate firmly?

    It's worth noting that since 1955 Labour has only won a majority of seats in England 4 times. Scottish independence could make it more likely that there's a (more) permanent Tory majority,

    The Tories holding out against the SNP until the pressure becomes so intense that independence is assured would probably be the best possible outcome for the Tories long-term interests.

    Which is what is playing out.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    edited April 2021

    The piece that still resonates with me was in the Spectator last week. Labour are the AND party - to support them you have to support this AND this AND this AND this and any dissent on any of them makes you a traitor. The Tories are the OR party - to support them you can support this OR this OR this and if you don't like most policies but vote for them for this one, welcome to the party!

    There is no way that a party as inept as the current Tories can maintain their current level of support. Punters generally want competent fair government and despite the pox and Brexit making many voters suspend this, it won't last. However I don't put it past the Tories to reinvent themselves with a new leader leading a "new" government.

    Then we have Labour. Without significant seats won in Scotland there is no route to a majority. Without a wholesale rethink of how to speak to people they aren't going to win back seats in the former red wall. Starmer isn't really the problem, the party is. A Blair would lead from the front, inspire the centre and build an unstoppable coalition of voters. I just don't see that Labour have anyone of that calibre to choose from...

    That’s not quite true. It can be done. But the path is narrow and complicated.

    123 seats need to be won. However, of those 123 seats where Labour wins on a UNS of 5.2% - not quite a Blair style swing, but much larger than the one Thatcher got - sixteen are held by the SNP and one by Plaid Cymru (which will of course be redrawn into a new seat anyway). That’s before we consider they will either lose or face significant cuts to majorities in several seats due to redrawn boundaries, while in others the majority they face may well increase.

    Roughly speaking, therefore, they need to be making realistic challenges in Wimbledon, Telford, Bassetlaw and Stafford. Now that’s not impossible. They held have held all four seats in the last 20 years, and indeed Bassetlaw was a Labour seat until 2019.

    The issue is, not only does it require the government to implode more spectacularly than Middlesex’s batting lineup, but unless the government’s decline is so abrupt it renders campaigns meaningless - as in 1997 when several paper candidates were unexpectedly elected - it requires them to be able to mount a simultaneous ground game in over 150 constituencies at once.

    It’s one hell of an ask.

    But with Boris Johnson in charge, all things are possible.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,388
    Although it looks as if the Tories should be in power for a long time, and things look gloomy for Labour, I'm not sure that current politics lends itself to rational analysis based on precedent.

    These are unprecedented times, both because of the virus, but equally because of the personality of the PM. It strikes me that the next three years are entirely unpredictable, and that the key will not be what happens to the economy or any other 'normal' metric, but what happens to BJ. Unlike Blair or Thatcher, for example, there's something inherently unstable about BJ, and he could implode at any time over some unforeseen issue. I don't deny his popularity at all, but I don't think the government or his rather cavalier leadership are built on very firm foundations, and he could easily be blown off course by events. Of course, Labour would have to be strong enough to exploit such events - it remains to be seen whether it will be. I think something, somewhere, may explode to blow the PM off course. At the moment he's treading carefully and avoiding the landmines, but he may well stand on one in due course.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,098
    edited April 2021

    spudgfsh said:

    It feels like to me that the labour party is currently in the same situation it was in 1988. They have a competent leader but not one who is going to inspire people to switch. The lack of vision for what they want to do is their biggest problem. You know what the Tories stand for and what they are going to do, even if you don't agree with it.

    It took the 1987 defeat to make Labour properly change their mindset and move them towards a credible alternative government but with so much ground to make up it took them two more elections to win. Something similar happened after 2005 for the Tories (but the change started with crowning Michael Howard).

    The one thing that could change everything is a Scottish vote for independence. Will voters abandon the Tories? Will Labour be able to convince people that they will be able to negotiate firmly?

    It's worth noting that since 1955 Labour has only won a majority of seats in England 4 times. Scottish independence could make it more likely that there's a (more) permanent Tory majority,

    The Tories holding out against the SNP until the pressure becomes so intense that independence is assured would probably be the best possible outcome for the Tories long-term interests.

    Which is what is playing out.

    Except with 50% of Scots at least still wanting to keep the Union and most not wanting an indyref2 in the immediate future the pressure is mainly from the Nationalist side, so the Tories can correctly refuse a legal and recognised indyref2 until at least the next UK general election in 2024 and they will
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675
    Hubris is not in short supply in Tory circles. We all know what follows.

    When the end comes it could well be quick and brutal.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,749

    moonshine said:

    moonshine said:
    Most of our tech for the past 60-70 years has come from alien reverse engineering since Roswell. (Best one I heard was Velcro!)

    And now, the centre of hi-tech isn't Silicon Valley, it is under the Martian surface. Says a bloke who should know (or who has gone bat-shit crazy.)

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/weird-news/former-israeli-space-security-chief-says-extraterrestrials-exist-trump-knows-n1250333
    Aliens using Velcro sounds a bit like cosmonauts using pencils when NASA was inventing the space pen.

    The American officials (and ex officials) have been quite careful not to sound too outlandish. They’re basically saying “we are seeing things that are not ours, they interfere with our military operations, in a lot of cases they defy our understanding of materials science and physics itself, and we have a lot of multi point evidence backing it up. We need insight on what these things are”.

    A multi decades campaign of public ridicule on the subject has meant people have been too scared to engage with it. At least in America, that’s now changing. We’ve yet to catch up here, somewhere between 2-3 years behind the process in America I’d say.
    Looking at current Earth politics would be rather fascinating if it was the case that Russia, China, the EU were excluded from a US-Alien technology alliance....
    Who says they’ve allied with the US? Maybe it’s the Chinese who are the favoured children and they are the ones who can now break the sound barrier without causing a sonic boom. Or have perfected trans medium transport (equally fast in air and water).

    If I were a paranoid US military type figure, these intelligence reports would disturb me greatly. As it is, I just sit back and enjoy the ride, taking comfort from the human story so far being on balance a positive one. Despite them almost certainly being there from our start if they’re with us now (as looks increasingly likely).
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Dura_Ace said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Please, not fifty years of Johnson. I'll be dead in twenty and I don't want that duplicitous b****** ruining my twilight years.
    Hate to break it to you, but it was suggested to me the other day by an MP that having go the top job, he now has Longest. Ever. PM. as his target....
    23 years simply ain’t gonna happen. No matter what he thinks or wishes.
    PB Header from 2043... The Odds on Prime Minister Boris Johnson Marrying for a 9th Time Have Shortened to 4/1.

    Below the line... HYUFD states that there will be a military intervention (if the British Army can get any of its 3 tanks to start) to prevent the inevitable Cumbrian independence referendum, Sean is pretending to be a Chinese AI and apparently something inconsequential happened in 'F1'.
    And my comment will still be, ‘why does he want to get married again when he fucks us all every day of the week?’
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,612
    IanB2 said:

    The Indian coronavirus mutation could “scupper” the UK’s march to freedom, a leading scientist has warned, despite the lockdown and vaccine programme leading to cases falling to a seven-month low.

    Covid-19 infections across the UK dropped to the lowest level since the autumn, according to the latest figures.

    But a professor of immunology has called for Britain to be on its guard against a third wave after a possible vaccine-busting mutation was recorded in England and Scotland.

    Public Health England (PHE) reported that 77 cases of the B.1.617 variant, which was first discovered in India, have been found.

    Imperial College’s Danny Altmann said that as a result, those arriving into the country from India should be subject to a hotel quarantine if the UK is to shut out variants that could set back the Prime Minister’s lockdown easing plans.

    But despite the warnings, Downing Street has insisted Boris Johnson’s trip to India later this month - his first major international visit since securing a Brexit trade deal with Brussels - will go ahead.

    It has potential echoes of Jim Callaghan in Guadeloupe.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,919
    ydoethur said:

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Please, not fifty years of Johnson. I'll be dead in twenty and I don't want that duplicitous b****** ruining my twilight years.
    Hate to break it to you, but it was suggested to me the other day by an MP that having go the top job, he now has Longest. Ever. PM. as his target....
    23 years simply ain’t gonna happen. No matter what he thinks or wishes.
    Boris might want to become our longest-serving Prime Minister or he might get bored and walk away. Indeed, both might be true. We should remember Boris needed to be strongarmed into a second term as Mayor of London.

    There is also the question of wealth. I am unconvinced by reports of Boris's genteel poverty but they do exist. On that note, he will have a new datum: that David Cameron was in line for £60 million for sending a few text messages.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,388
    edited April 2021

    The piece that still resonates with me was in the Spectator last week. Labour are the AND party - to support them you have to support this AND this AND this AND this and any dissent on any of them makes you a traitor. The Tories are the OR party - to support them you can support this OR this OR this and if you don't like most policies but vote for them for this one, welcome to the party!

    There is no way that a party as inept as the current Tories can maintain their current level of support. Punters generally want competent fair government and despite the pox and Brexit making many voters suspend this, it won't last. However I don't put it past the Tories to reinvent themselves with a new leader leading a "new" government.

    Then we have Labour. Without significant seats won in Scotland there is no route to a majority. Without a wholesale rethink of how to speak to people they aren't going to win back seats in the former red wall. Starmer isn't really the problem, the party is. A Blair would lead from the front, inspire the centre and build an unstoppable coalition of voters. I just don't see that Labour have anyone of that calibre to choose from...

    More than that, perhaps the most important underlying factor that has changed over the course of the century so far is that, back in 2000, it was Labour that was the party of optimism, which looked as if it felt at ease with the country as it was. The Conservatives were the 'nasty party' that didn't much like what Britain had become or many of the people in it.

    Now the situation is reversed. Labour is the party you support if you think that the country is a cesspool of racism and all kinds of horrid phobias, and most of the voters are brain dead scum who are wholly complicit in its manifold evils. Its remaining support base is very heavily skewed towards pissed off youths, minority interests and various shades of hard leftists and, apart from the occasional act of ritual genuflection before the NHS, they give a strong impression of having nothing good to say about Britain at all.

    Starmer himself was meant to be the next Kinnock, but you do wonder if he's more like Labour's IDS? I don't know - yes, a lot could change in the years ahead, but how is this iteration of Labour meant to win back large numbers of voters directly from the Tories (or the SNP, for that matter?) It doesn't look at all promising for them...
    Your hyperbolic characterisation of Labour supporters doesn't match any that I know, and I know a lot. It just ain't true.

    Most of us are decent people who want what is best for the country, but just happen to believe that what's best includes a reduction in gross inequalities and a more tolerant, forward-looking culture. It's an optimistic vision.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,200
    Food for thought in this Header albeit of the unappetizing kind. I'm not quite swallowing it but neither am I sending it back to the kitchen in a huff. I still hope that Labour can get competitive for GE24 and I'm not about to write them off yet. Ditto Starmer's leadership. These are exceptional circumstances. Let's see how it looks in a few months.

    But, yes, the great political realignment away from class based voting has been turbocharged by Brexit/Johnson and the Tories have emerged massively on the right side of it. The equal and opposite applies to Labour. The old rules for analysis must be binned. They're no use any more. Serve only to mislead and lead to bad calls and losing bets. Hartlepool, for example, has become a Con seat and a Labour target. The sort of seat Labour can win if they're on the up. It's truly fascinating.

    The best GE bet imo is Cons largest party. I'm on that at 1.8 and it remains excellent value at 1.66.

    A new punditry for a new politics. Welcome aboard, David. There are a few of us now. :smile:
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    OK, completely off topic, but I need help from you guys.

    I have to decide who to vote for. In 2019 I spoiled my ballot paper, but I don’t want to do that again. People died for my right to vote and the very least I can do is use it.

    But - I have in all elections a choice of three candidates. Con, Lab, Green.

    The Cons are out. More out than a Hundred batter.

    Labour will win easily, so in a sense this soul searching is irrelevant. But I’m dubious about them at the moment, particularly since both sets of local councillors have spent the last four years ignoring all local issues.

    That leaves the Greens.

    I’ve searched high, and low, and sideways. Can I find anything about their position on vaccine passports? Can I ecky thump.

    Does anyone know whether they are opposed to ID cards by stealth vaccine passports?

    About the only meaningful policy they have for Cannock is they want us to have much worse train services. Which for some obscure reason does not inspire me.

    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,098

    The piece that still resonates with me was in the Spectator last week. Labour are the AND party - to support them you have to support this AND this AND this AND this and any dissent on any of them makes you a traitor. The Tories are the OR party - to support them you can support this OR this OR this and if you don't like most policies but vote for them for this one, welcome to the party!

    There is no way that a party as inept as the current Tories can maintain their current level of support. Punters generally want competent fair government and despite the pox and Brexit making many voters suspend this, it won't last. However I don't put it past the Tories to reinvent themselves with a new leader leading a "new" government.

    Then we have Labour. Without significant seats won in Scotland there is no route to a majority. Without a wholesale rethink of how to speak to people they aren't going to win back seats in the former red wall. Starmer isn't really the problem, the party is. A Blair would lead from the front, inspire the centre and build an unstoppable coalition of voters. I just don't see that Labour have anyone of that calibre to choose from...

    More than that, perhaps the most important underlying factor that has changed over the course of the century so far is that, back in 2000, it was Labour that was the party of optimism, which looked as if it felt at ease with the country as it was. The Conservatives were the 'nasty party' that didn't much like what Britain had become or many of the people in it.

    Now the situation is reversed. Labour is the party you support if you think that the country is a cesspool of racism and all kinds of horrid phobias, and most of the voters are brain dead scum who are wholly complicit in its manifold evils. Its remaining support base is very heavily skewed towards pissed off youths, minority interests and various shades of hard leftists and, apart from the occasional act of ritual genuflection before the NHS, they give a strong impression of having nothing good to say about Britain at all.

    Starmer himself was meant to be the next Kinnock, but you do wonder if he's more like Labour's IDS? I don't know - yes, a lot could change in the years ahead, but how is this iteration of Labour meant to win back large numbers of voters directly from the Tories (or the SNP, for that matter?) It doesn't look at all promising for them...
    IDS' final poll as Tory leader had the Tories on 34%, Kinnock got 34% in 1992
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,893
    For as long as the SNP have a strangehold of Scotland, the Tories will be locked into power. It's never going to be palatable for the rest of the UK to have the SNP to have the casting vote on every bill. Any time Labour get close to winning the SNP card will be pulled and the cycle will go on and on until Scottish Labour can win a significant number of seats back.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,919
    Cyclefree said:

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Ditto Italy - and it collapsed spectacularly because of corruption scandals - Operazione Mani Pulite.

    Though, sadly and ironically enough, that led to the election of one of the most venal leaders Italy has ever had. So even if a regime falls, there is no guarantee that what will replace it will be any better.

    My very first case as an in-house investigator related to one of the cases brought by Italian magistrates against various politicians. It involved a Sicilian businessman (concrete was his business), a Swiss bank, an Italian state-owned enterprise and 2 apparently unsuspecting and naive US banks. What fun that was. The main lesson it taught me is that there is nothing people won't believe if they badly want it to be true.

    The Daily Star is noted for its astute political coverage. Its front page offers: FREE Big fat NHS contract for every reader's SISTER.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-56781228
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Artist said:

    For as long as the SNP have a strangehold of Scotland, the Tories will be locked into power. It's never going to be palatable for the rest of the UK to have the SNP to have the casting vote on every bill. Any time Labour get close to winning the SNP card will be pulled and the cycle will go on and on until Scottish Labour can win a significant number of seats back.

    In 1988, quite serious commentators argued that the ending of capital controls meant Labour could never win again, as every time Labour seemed likely to win capital flight would ensue and the voters be frightened back to the Tories.

    That didn’t quite work out.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,200
    edited April 2021
    ydoethur said:

    OK, completely off topic, but I need help from you guys.

    I have to decide who to vote for. In 2019 I spoiled my ballot paper, but I don’t want to do that again. People died for my right to vote and the very least I can do is use it.

    But - I have in all elections a choice of three candidates. Con, Lab, Green.

    The Cons are out. More out than a Hundred batter.

    Labour will win easily, so in a sense this soul searching is irrelevant. But I’m dubious about them at the moment, particularly since both sets of local councillors have spent the last four years ignoring all local issues.

    That leaves the Greens.

    I’ve searched high, and low, and sideways. Can I find anything about their position on vaccine passports? Can I ecky thump.

    Does anyone know whether they are opposed to ID cards by stealth vaccine passports?

    About the only meaningful policy they have for Cannock is they want us to have much worse train services. Which for some obscure reason does not inspire me.

    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.

    Caroline Lucas is one of the loudest opponents of vaxports.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, completely off topic, but I need help from you guys.

    I have to decide who to vote for. In 2019 I spoiled my ballot paper, but I don’t want to do that again. People died for my right to vote and the very least I can do is use it.

    But - I have in all elections a choice of three candidates. Con, Lab, Green.

    The Cons are out. More out than a Hundred batter.

    Labour will win easily, so in a sense this soul searching is irrelevant. But I’m dubious about them at the moment, particularly since both sets of local councillors have spent the last four years ignoring all local issues.

    That leaves the Greens.

    I’ve searched high, and low, and sideways. Can I find anything about their position on vaccine passports? Can I ecky thump.

    Does anyone know whether they are opposed to ID cards by stealth vaccine passports?

    About the only meaningful policy they have for Cannock is they want us to have much worse train services. Which for some obscure reason does not inspire me.

    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.

    Caroline Lucas is one of the loudest opponents of vaxports.
    Thanks for the info. Do you have a link?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    ydoethur said:



    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.

    Reflexively against.

    Plenty of my fellow Greens won't be vaccinated for the same reason as me - tested on animals.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,217
    ydoethur said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, completely off topic, but I need help from you guys.

    I have to decide who to vote for. In 2019 I spoiled my ballot paper, but I don’t want to do that again. People died for my right to vote and the very least I can do is use it.

    But - I have in all elections a choice of three candidates. Con, Lab, Green.

    The Cons are out. More out than a Hundred batter.

    Labour will win easily, so in a sense this soul searching is irrelevant. But I’m dubious about them at the moment, particularly since both sets of local councillors have spent the last four years ignoring all local issues.

    That leaves the Greens.

    I’ve searched high, and low, and sideways. Can I find anything about their position on vaccine passports? Can I ecky thump.

    Does anyone know whether they are opposed to ID cards by stealth vaccine passports?

    About the only meaningful policy they have for Cannock is they want us to have much worse train services. Which for some obscure reason does not inspire me.

    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.

    Caroline Lucas is one of the loudest opponents of vaxports.
    Thanks for the info. Do you have a link?
    Is there not a contact on a leaflet if you have one?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, completely off topic, but I need help from you guys.

    I have to decide who to vote for. In 2019 I spoiled my ballot paper, but I don’t want to do that again. People died for my right to vote and the very least I can do is use it.

    But - I have in all elections a choice of three candidates. Con, Lab, Green.

    The Cons are out. More out than a Hundred batter.

    Labour will win easily, so in a sense this soul searching is irrelevant. But I’m dubious about them at the moment, particularly since both sets of local councillors have spent the last four years ignoring all local issues.

    That leaves the Greens.

    I’ve searched high, and low, and sideways. Can I find anything about their position on vaccine passports? Can I ecky thump.

    Does anyone know whether they are opposed to ID cards by stealth vaccine passports?

    About the only meaningful policy they have for Cannock is they want us to have much worse train services. Which for some obscure reason does not inspire me.

    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.

    Caroline Lucas is one of the loudest opponents of vaxports.
    Thanks for the info. Do you have a link?
    Is there not a contact on a leaflet if you have one?
    I haven’t had any leaflets from any fecking party whatsoever.
  • Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    Fishing said:

    Quincel said:

    On the one hand, I agree with a lot of the logic in this header. On the other hand, I'm very aware that this is the sort of thing which is often said just before a long-standing government spectacularly collapses and we all laugh about it later.

    Good morning everybody.

    What a sensible post to start the thread. Never say never.
    Yes, the last time I remember reading so many articles like this was the summer of 1992.
    Yup. Also:
    https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/conference/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,919

    Cyclefree said:

    Nothing lasts forever. Even the longest, the most glittering reign, must end someday.

    FPT: Good morning, everyone.

    F1: interesting video on practice so far:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIArL3DPbrs

    Didn't Japan have 50 yrs of one party rule before it collapsed spectacularly?
    Ditto Italy - and it collapsed spectacularly because of corruption scandals - Operazione Mani Pulite.

    Though, sadly and ironically enough, that led to the election of one of the most venal leaders Italy has ever had. So even if a regime falls, there is no guarantee that what will replace it will be any better.

    My very first case as an in-house investigator related to one of the cases brought by Italian magistrates against various politicians. It involved a Sicilian businessman (concrete was his business), a Swiss bank, an Italian state-owned enterprise and 2 apparently unsuspecting and naive US banks. What fun that was. The main lesson it taught me is that there is nothing people won't believe if they badly want it to be true.

    The Daily Star is noted for its astute political coverage. Its front page offers: FREE Big fat NHS contract for every reader's SISTER.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-56781228
    The Financial Times (same link) asks "How sleazy is British politics?" above its (unrelated) headline that "Cameron pitched Greensill to Berlin official as probe deepened".
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,905

    The piece that still resonates with me was in the Spectator last week. Labour are the AND party - to support them you have to support this AND this AND this AND this and any dissent on any of them makes you a traitor. The Tories are the OR party - to support them you can support this OR this OR this and if you don't like most policies but vote for them for this one, welcome to the party!

    There is no way that a party as inept as the current Tories can maintain their current level of support. Punters generally want competent fair government and despite the pox and Brexit making many voters suspend this, it won't last. However I don't put it past the Tories to reinvent themselves with a new leader leading a "new" government.

    Then we have Labour. Without significant seats won in Scotland there is no route to a majority. Without a wholesale rethink of how to speak to people they aren't going to win back seats in the former red wall. Starmer isn't really the problem, the party is. A Blair would lead from the front, inspire the centre and build an unstoppable coalition of voters. I just don't see that Labour have anyone of that calibre to choose from...

    So we have the Tories who simply HAVE to lose seats, but Labour who can't actually win them off them - and LibDem's so wedded to the EU they can't either.
    New Party time?
    Somebody seems to be forgetting that 48% of the electorate voted to remain in the EU. Being in favour of a good working relationship with our nearest neighbours is by no means unpopular. A large number of people who have voted Conservative in the past are now looking for a new home.

    The problem that some PB posters have is that they assume that once a person has voted Conservative, he will continue to do that for the rest of his life.

    In fact, there is a very large pool of people who could vote Conservative, or Lib Dem, or UKIP - and which way they vote in any one election will be influenced by a large number of factors. Similarly, there is a large pool of people who could go Labour, or Lib Dem, or Green Party, and the same principle also applies.

    In the present round of local elections, the Lib Dems are talking about local issues, not national ones. Boris Johnson is irrelevant. I would not be surprised by a good Lib Dem result in May.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,200
    ydoethur said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, completely off topic, but I need help from you guys.

    I have to decide who to vote for. In 2019 I spoiled my ballot paper, but I don’t want to do that again. People died for my right to vote and the very least I can do is use it.

    But - I have in all elections a choice of three candidates. Con, Lab, Green.

    The Cons are out. More out than a Hundred batter.

    Labour will win easily, so in a sense this soul searching is irrelevant. But I’m dubious about them at the moment, particularly since both sets of local councillors have spent the last four years ignoring all local issues.

    That leaves the Greens.

    I’ve searched high, and low, and sideways. Can I find anything about their position on vaccine passports? Can I ecky thump.

    Does anyone know whether they are opposed to ID cards by stealth vaccine passports?

    About the only meaningful policy they have for Cannock is they want us to have much worse train services. Which for some obscure reason does not inspire me.

    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.

    Caroline Lucas is one of the loudest opponents of vaxports.
    Thanks for the info. Do you have a link?
    If you google her appearance on ch4 news with Ed Davey ...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    algarkirk said:

    Cookie said:

    Interesting article. My favourite part is one rather brief sentence : "Brexit is a proxy rather than an ideological starting point".
    Every attempt to understand the current state of British politics ought to start with thia line.

    True. But there is an important add on: In reality a decent implementation of Brexit - a process taking years and has hardly started - must be the central long term general political concern. At the moment there is precisely one party and one only which has the slightest claim to credibility when it comes to actually supporting the principle of it (though of course even most Tory big names in recent history have always been against it).

    The only alternative to the Tories is a rainbow alliance with Labour in the lead. At the next election (sooner rather than later I suspect) it will become obvious that and alliance of Lab, LD, PC, SNP and Green are not the obvious grouping for an enthusiastic continuation of Brexit policy. Labour will say the right things of course but the level of belief is its credibility will be nil. Even lower for all other parties.

    Unless there is a solution to this electoral conundrum no sort of multi party normality can prevail. No other possible government has its heart in Brexit. Labour show no sign of solving it yet.

    Yes, but don't forget 48% voted against Brexit, and they were the younger voters. As time goes on those with an emotional investment in Brexit will be no more and those who either opposed it or were indifferent will predominate. That is a lot of voters, and a lot depends on how Brexit works out, in particular for the old coalfield communities. If the people making money are still the metropolitans while they live on scraps then don't expect too much gratitude. They voted for change, a reversion of course, but change nevertheless.

    While Labour has always been a coalition of interests (Attlee was a London lawyer too), rarely have the Tories had such a coalition as the current one between free-market, low tax Atlanticists, and working class communities, wanting protection from competition and magic money tree spending. It is as difficult a combination as Labour has.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, completely off topic, but I need help from you guys.

    I have to decide who to vote for. In 2019 I spoiled my ballot paper, but I don’t want to do that again. People died for my right to vote and the very least I can do is use it.

    But - I have in all elections a choice of three candidates. Con, Lab, Green.

    The Cons are out. More out than a Hundred batter.

    Labour will win easily, so in a sense this soul searching is irrelevant. But I’m dubious about them at the moment, particularly since both sets of local councillors have spent the last four years ignoring all local issues.

    That leaves the Greens.

    I’ve searched high, and low, and sideways. Can I find anything about their position on vaccine passports? Can I ecky thump.

    Does anyone know whether they are opposed to ID cards by stealth vaccine passports?

    About the only meaningful policy they have for Cannock is they want us to have much worse train services. Which for some obscure reason does not inspire me.

    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.

    Caroline Lucas is one of the loudest opponents of vaxports.
    Thanks for the info. Do you have a link?
    If you google her appearance on ch4 news with Ed Davey ...
    Just found it, thank you.

    She may be opposed (judging from her remarks) for many of the wrong reasons. But she is at least opposed. The rest is detail.

    Looks like I’m going with the Greens.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    ClippP said:

    The piece that still resonates with me was in the Spectator last week. Labour are the AND party - to support them you have to support this AND this AND this AND this and any dissent on any of them makes you a traitor. The Tories are the OR party - to support them you can support this OR this OR this and if you don't like most policies but vote for them for this one, welcome to the party!

    There is no way that a party as inept as the current Tories can maintain their current level of support. Punters generally want competent fair government and despite the pox and Brexit making many voters suspend this, it won't last. However I don't put it past the Tories to reinvent themselves with a new leader leading a "new" government.

    Then we have Labour. Without significant seats won in Scotland there is no route to a majority. Without a wholesale rethink of how to speak to people they aren't going to win back seats in the former red wall. Starmer isn't really the problem, the party is. A Blair would lead from the front, inspire the centre and build an unstoppable coalition of voters. I just don't see that Labour have anyone of that calibre to choose from...

    So we have the Tories who simply HAVE to lose seats, but Labour who can't actually win them off them - and LibDem's so wedded to the EU they can't either.
    New Party time?
    Somebody seems to be forgetting that 48% of the electorate voted to remain in the EU. Being in favour of a good working relationship with our nearest neighbours is by no means unpopular. A large number of people who have voted Conservative in the past are now looking for a new home.

    The problem that some PB posters have is that they assume that once a person has voted Conservative, he will continue to do that for the rest of his life.

    In fact, there is a very large pool of people who could vote Conservative, or Lib Dem, or UKIP - and which way they vote in any one election will be influenced by a large number of factors. Similarly, there is a large pool of people who could go Labour, or Lib Dem, or Green Party, and the same principle also applies.

    In the present round of local elections, the Lib Dems are talking about local issues, not national ones. Boris Johnson is irrelevant. I would not be surprised by a good Lib Dem result in May.
    I’d probably vote for them if they were standing.

    And Gallowgate was expressing exasperation about their lack of effort in Ashington.

    I hope they have a good result, but they’ve got to want it for themselves.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,429
    moonshine said:
    It is genuinely intriguing. Thanks for highlighting much of this

    Oumuamua!

    Who knew?

    One thing is for sure, if it is proved intelligent alien life has reached earth and is making contact - the most momentous discovery in the history of Homo sapiens - the third PB header following this galactic encounter will focus on what it all means for voting reform in Wales
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,200
    edited April 2021
    ydoethur said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    kinabalu said:

    ydoethur said:

    OK, completely off topic, but I need help from you guys.

    I have to decide who to vote for. In 2019 I spoiled my ballot paper, but I don’t want to do that again. People died for my right to vote and the very least I can do is use it.

    But - I have in all elections a choice of three candidates. Con, Lab, Green.

    The Cons are out. More out than a Hundred batter.

    Labour will win easily, so in a sense this soul searching is irrelevant. But I’m dubious about them at the moment, particularly since both sets of local councillors have spent the last four years ignoring all local issues.

    That leaves the Greens.

    I’ve searched high, and low, and sideways. Can I find anything about their position on vaccine passports? Can I ecky thump.

    Does anyone know whether they are opposed to ID cards by stealth vaccine passports?

    About the only meaningful policy they have for Cannock is they want us to have much worse train services. Which for some obscure reason does not inspire me.

    But if they are against vax passports, I will be willing to consider voting for them.

    Caroline Lucas is one of the loudest opponents of vaxports.
    Thanks for the info. Do you have a link?
    If you google her appearance on ch4 news with Ed Davey ...
    Just found it, thank you.

    She may be opposed (judging from her remarks) for many of the wrong reasons. But she is at least opposed. The rest is detail.

    Looks like I’m going with the Greens.
    I've been known to vote for them in the locals.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    ydoethur said:



    Looks like I’m going with the Greens.

    Welcome aboard. Read "The World Without Us", watch "Seaspiracy" and brick your nearest butcher's window.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Dura_Ace said:

    ydoethur said:



    Looks like I’m going with the Greens.

    Welcome aboard. Read "The World Without Us", watch "Seaspiracy" and brick your nearest butcher's window.
    With my aim, if I tried to brick the butcher’s window I’d end up hitting the food bank/charity shop not quite opposite.
This discussion has been closed.