LAB is going to be a lot harder to demonise next time without Corbyn – politicalbetting.com
LAB is going to be a lot harder to demonise next time without Corbyn – politicalbetting.com
Before I head off for my Lake District holiday some thoughts on the big picture – the next UK general election.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
As a horse racing follower when throughout the summer the going has been heavy and numerous meetings have been called off I am surprised by the comment "overall 2021's summer "is certainly looking drier and warmer than average".
Can anyone advise what we need to divide 756,900 by to get an indication of daily infection rates?
7?
10?
14?
However Starmer is not feared like Corbyn is by middle class voters, so I doubt he will fall as low as Corbyn did in 2019 seats wise either and he may be able to pick up more LD tactical voters
1. the Tory worm is showing a decline over the last three months, whilst the Labour worm is flatlining, they are not benefiting from that decline.
2. Meanwhile the Tory polling remains resolutely over 40. However, during the election campaign the Tories were absolute genius to steal and own the Brexit party voters - and during that campaign you totalled remain parties polling together and the Tories plus smither of Brexit numbers together, the best remain did was close to even, normally a smaller total. That’s completely changed now - Lab, libdem and green added together is by far the bigger total now. That could indicate there’s a key shift going on as we move into post Brexit politics.
3. Because it was a December election, I’m not sure this is so far after the vote to be mid term, besides which, the Tory success on jabbing and getting us back to normal, and the fact COVID has hampered Starmer’s attempts to raise his profile, I’m not sure it’s going to be a normal mid term. It’s not vital IMO for Labour to be miles ahead mid term anyway, in other countries voters don’t know for sure who the candidate is going to be until months to go to the campaign, it don’t seem to do them any harm.
Lower limit, I'd say, is 14, upper 21.
The economy is about to grow faster than it has since the Barber boom of the early 70s, employment will be at record highs again by the end of the year and we just might see the deficit fall faster than we expect. A lot of that growth and new jobs will come in the north of England. Inflation is going to be a minor issue but given our debt mountain range (1 mountain no longer covers it) even that is not an unmixed blessing. Considering what we have been through this will be a really strong record and even now SKS is struggling to explain what he would do differently.
I am very conscious of a particular newspaper article when writing this but I think that I have a lot more reason to be confident than Sion Simon ever did.
Mid term, with lots of bad headlines in the papers, but with a leader that is more well liked and charismatic than the LotO I can't see how any reasoned analysis can see past a Con maj as by far the most likely outcome
Nobody can make robust predictions about the next election (other than the obvious such as "everything depends on how many seat losses") until a few months before said election. As we are two or three years away, I think we'd do as well to read the results in bird guts.
You cant trivially get from that to "new infections per day"
Logical and intelligent people on here seem to letting their heart rule their head.
We are mid term in the 12th year of a Tory Government and every poll has them leading (and has done for months) with some pointing to a huge majority, yet peoples readings from this is that Labour will be making huge gains.
Now they may end up being right but based on the current evidence there is no way you can conclude that.
So it implies the testing is capturing 67-75% of infections. Have no feel for whether that is realistic.
But I don't see how you can justify a lower divisor given the fact that most people are infected for 14-28 days. Unless you argue a massive skew towards the 14 days.
(Image from UKPollingReport)
I think we can conclude that we have not yet reached 100,000 cases per day by any measure.
I was thinking that if it is appropriate to divide by 7 then we had.
Labour should be ahead all the time now if they are going to prevent a Tory Majority, not 3-10 points behind.
I do not see inflation as the benefit and the quickest way to run down the debt the Boris boys on here do either. Inflation reminds me of increased mortgage rates and the repossessions and negative equity of the early 1990s.
BBC News - Time's Up: Boss quits over ties to scandal-hit governor Andrew Cuomo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-58354600
If there were a plausible alternative government-in-waiting, I think the figures would be drastically different.
But where should we go!?
At present, there are too many policies and personnel in Lab that I simply couldn't vote for. Does Lab want to change that? Probably not otherwise what are they. I could live with strong Union links as long as, as per Sharon's statement, the focus is on empowering workers not running the country along Marxist-Leninist lines. Then there is the anti-semitism thing, then there is the hate the rich thing.
So prob quite a gulf between me and a Lab vote.
So the Cons vote you are right might not be that strong but we atm ain't going to Lab.
This is a recurring claim.
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/03/22/it-looks-like-theres-major-mispricing-in-the-majority-market/
England cases still flat....for the moment.
Cases were rising in young people (and everyone) well before that, and it takes ~1w for new cases to get detected
https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1431261610715267074?s=20
For what it is worth, as a Labour member myself I really do think the party is moving back to the centre and the people that you refer to are leaving (albeit slowly).
Starmer has a short window between now and this time next year to really build something different, then it's time for him to go if he can not.
When there's a plausible alternative - and by plausible I don't mean just economically sensible but able to block out people's fears of the radical Left on social and cultural issues - the numbers will change quickly and a lot.
They don't need to do this nationally, rather targetted in the way Jezza the terrorist sympathizing anti-British danger to national security was deployed in certain places.
If the economy booms as the PB Tories believe, Johnson wins a handsome majority. If it tanks they might not.
Labour got their worst ever vote share in all three. Am I the only one who thinks that is bad for an opposition in by elections?
I do believe Labour is now headed in the right direction and for me I perceive it to be going back towards proper social democracy, which is what my ideology leans into. The 2019 manifesto was too left wing for me.
Burnham or David Miliband might do better but neither are currently MPs
LOTOs - In retrospect Hague was better than he appeared at the time, but he came across as inexperienced and a bit ridiculous - a bit like Ed Miliband, perhaps. Starmer is more experienced in life at least, and comes across as more capable, if a bit dull. Personally I would rate him as a better candidate than either Miliband or Hague. And maybe by 2024 dull will be in fashion again.
PMs - Blair on the other hand (in 2001) was running a competent government and personally had more ability in his little finger than the useless dolt in charge now. And I say this as someone with no great love for either. Although I would agree they are probably of equal charisma, in their own way.
So overall I think we have a slightly stronger LOTO up against a very much weaker PM, and once politics returns to normal by next summer I think Johnson will be in trouble unless things go well. And for that reason I think he will be disposed of so the Tories can reinvent themselves again before the next election, and win again.
Starmer has, he really should lean into that.
I doubt Erin O'Toole has what it takes though, so I expect another Lib minority sadly.
Johnson is now constantly unpopular and has been for some time (net approval is very much in the red). The issue is that Starmer is at best as unpopular, at worst more unpopular - he needs to do something about that.
I can't understand how Starmer is so unpopular to be honest, he doesn't seem to have done much notable publicly at all - but perhaps others who are less biased than me can explain that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Brent_East_by-election
But it's only Chesham and Amersham...
One of the things which slightly concerns me is that the conditional reduction in death risk is probably nearer 75% than 95%. And there's a huge difference between vaccination giving (say) 80% of people 100% protection against infection versus it giving 100% of people 80% less chance of infection on each opportunity, or somewhere in between. These are largely indistinguishable with the data we currently have. Yet in the latter case there are still going to be, over time, a lot more COVID deaths to come.
--AS
But we really are in a place where there are a lot of disaffected Cons ex-voters and ex-party members out there so developments will be vitally important.
If you could save me from having to vote for a party run by Boris Johnson then that would be fantastic.
They aren't close to their Winter peaks unless I am reading the data wrong.
If Brexit is a total shitshow, all bets are off.
Labour Governments have been fantastic at wrecking the public finances and throwing open the borders to all and sundry.
And then what's Labour's selling point?
My understanding from those in the know - and this is just friends of friends who know Starmer, so I wouldn't take much from it - is that Starmer won't promise to spend a lot of money outside of a few very key areas.
Celebrate Good Times C'Mon 5%
Stuck In the Middle With You 35%
Desolation Row 60%
So that last one is the value bet at current odds.
Tories always get labelled as racist, baby eating, hate the poor, etc. When Boris ran for London Mayor there was a huge push to scare people that he was going to be ethnically clensing the city as he is such a massive racist.
My rough guess for 2024 (or even 2023) is that the Conservatives are north of 40%, but still probably down 2-3 percentage points. I also assume there is a mild increase in tactical voting, as memory of the coalition fades in Labour memories.
Under this scenario (and adding the ten seats that come through the boundary changes), Labour probably picks up 10 to 15 seats from the Conservatives, while the LibDems gain 4 to 6. It's not clear, given Scotland loses seats, that the SNP will actually end up with greater Westminster representation next time around.