"Canadian teenager Leylah Fernandez shocked another high-ranked opponent in second seed Aryna Sabalenka to reach the US Open final - where she could face 18-year-old Briton Emma Raducanu."
The care/NI story is clearly the biggest in the news - and the mix of broken promise and naked unfairness are the principal issues, overriding previous support for raising more money for health and care. Arguably (and there’s a parallel with tuition fees) it is the manifesto promise that was the mistake, deliberately intended to self-deny the flexibility to react to the unforeseen, and you get punished even for breaking a foolish promise.
Despite the mirth at the Brexit comments above, I wouldn’t rule out a secondary Brexit factor influencing the poll, either. OK, it’s a niche area, but it is only in the last few weeks as travel has been ‘unlocked’ that pet owners who travel with their pets have found out what Brexit really means for them. I’m on several forums and there has been an explosion of unhappiness - people are well aware that Norwegian and Swiss pets are covered by the passport scheme and hence it is this government’s approach that has created all the difficulty. Add that to the import/export problems many small business owners are facing and the first signs of shortages (and media coverage of stories like no Turkey or toys this Xmas) and I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the loss of the Tory support in this poll does indeed pin back to Brexit.
Not least because it is notable that the LibDems have done rather better from the fall in Tory support than Labour, and they haven’t been particularly better at capitalising on the NI concerns.
But Con was still averaging over 40% in polls until literally a few days ago.
If the other issues were a factor then Con support would have been falling much more prior to the last few days.
Probably lost in the MoE. And we’ll have to wait for other polls to see how significant the current move is.
I’m not saying it’s a huge effect - but I do think it’s there, beneath the noise.
In other news, I see that Waitrose has started charging for delivery orders from yesterday.
Do most of the other supermarkets charge for delivery?
Searching waitrose.com for parmesan gives as its first result Waitrose Davidstow Cornish Cheddar Vintage Strength 7. There's a red leicester in there as well. If Waitrose want an insomniac software QA tester, I'm available!
If the Westminster hacks are to be believed, plenty of ministers smelt trouble. But they all decided to stick with Bozza. Had any Cabinet.minister resigned over this, they'd be utterly vindicated tonight, and could well have been PM by St Edward's Day. But they're all complicit now. Funny old game, politics.
5 voted against and 39 abstained
Enough for letters to the 1922
The haste that this was rushed through the Commons from being announced to the Cabinet on Monday morning and voted on by Tuesday evening was really unbecoming.
It seems they were afraid that if they paused for breath that it would unravel, but the counterpoint is that if it unravels it has reason to do so and better to do so before you vote on it rather than afterwards.
A less hubristic government could have trailed this properly, seen it go down like a cup of cold sick, then have a rethink instead of committing to it.
Yup, walking this back is going to be extremely difficult which means it won't happen. If the vote was next week the leadership could have taken the temperature of the party over the weekend, seen the polling and then had a rethink on only attacking working people with this tax.
I don't personally think this can be reversed now that the vote has taken place, I guess the leadership may try and conspire to have it kicked back by the HoL and then quietly drop it but I think the reputational damage is done. The Tory party no is no longer the party of low taxes and getting on in life. That is going to vet difficult to shake without new leadership and an actual reversal of it and maybe actually cutting NI.
To my mind this is Boris' poll tax moment. The Tory party dumped Mrs Thatcher to save the 1992 election, they will need to dump Boris to save 2024 IMO. Labour are heading for 310-320 seats.
I'm not sure about this. The implication seems to be that choosing to raise taxes on working age people rather than the retired was the wrong thing to do (which I agree it definitely was, both morally and fiscally), and therefore the Tories are being punished for it in the polls. I suspect that, in fact, if they'd kept NI where it was but charge it on all pensioner income, the electoral impact would have been far greater.
I'm sure there are plenty of public-spirited pensioners who recognise they've had it much easier than the generations after them will, and are happy to bear the greater portion of the inevitable tax rises to keep public finances afloat. I'm almost as sure that they're outweighed by those who simply won't countenance supporting any party that threatens to raise their personal tax bill by a single farthing.
The problem for the Tories is that they rely on working age people to get a majority. It can't be repeated enough on here that in 2017 the average age of voting conservative was 55 and Theresa May lost the majority while in 2019 that crossover age went down to 39. The Tories won a plurality or majority of voters in all age groups from 40+ and were very competitive for 30-39 year olds as well.
Judging by my friends, family and colleagues around my age this is the single most toxic policy any of them have ever seen. The anecdata definitely matches the polling, people fed up of the Tories but not sure where to go. Philip Thompson, Casino Royale, Robert and I all find ourselves in the same position, three of us were Tory members and now none are going to vote for them.
Agreed. My point is, what would the impact have been in the alternate universe where NI was kept as it was, and the tax raid was on the retired?
I'm in a not dissimilar position to the four of you. The question is: who am I going to vote for then, if not the Conservatives? I'm not mad enough to believe that Ed Davey's going into the next election promising to reverse the NI increase. And even if he did, he'd be propping up a Labour government who'd be proposing much bigger tax increases on higher earners. So, in pure expected value terms, Johnson and Sunak have a hell of a long way to go before they stop being my best option. And, I suspect, yours.
Depends if the Orange-bookers win the fight for the LD's soul. The entirety of the economically liberal portion of the population is homeless, so if they go for some unobjectionable middle of the road social stuff and drop the EU flagshagging there could be an opening.
The economically liberal portion of the British population is like 6 or 7 guys, it's an incredibly niche proposition.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
If the Westminster hacks are to be believed, plenty of ministers smelt trouble. But they all decided to stick with Bozza. Had any Cabinet.minister resigned over this, they'd be utterly vindicated tonight, and could well have been PM by St Edward's Day. But they're all complicit now. Funny old game, politics.
5 voted against and 39 abstained
Enough for letters to the 1922
The haste that this was rushed through the Commons from being announced to the Cabinet on Monday morning and voted on by Tuesday evening was really unbecoming.
It seems they were afraid that if they paused for breath that it would unravel, but the counterpoint is that if it unravels it has reason to do so and better to do so before you vote on it rather than afterwards.
A less hubristic government could have trailed this properly, seen it go down like a cup of cold sick, then have a rethink instead of committing to it.
Yup, walking this back is going to be extremely difficult which means it won't happen. If the vote was next week the leadership could have taken the temperature of the party over the weekend, seen the polling and then had a rethink on only attacking working people with this tax.
I don't personally think this can be reversed now that the vote has taken place, I guess the leadership may try and conspire to have it kicked back by the HoL and then quietly drop it but I think the reputational damage is done. The Tory party no is no longer the party of low taxes and getting on in life. That is going to vet difficult to shake without new leadership and an actual reversal of it and maybe actually cutting NI.
To my mind this is Boris' poll tax moment. The Tory party dumped Mrs Thatcher to save the 1992 election, they will need to dump Boris to save 2024 IMO. Labour are heading for 310-320 seats.
I'm not sure about this. The implication seems to be that choosing to raise taxes on working age people rather than the retired was the wrong thing to do (which I agree it definitely was, both morally and fiscally), and therefore the Tories are being punished for it in the polls. I suspect that, in fact, if they'd kept NI where it was but charge it on all pensioner income, the electoral impact would have been far greater.
I'm sure there are plenty of public-spirited pensioners who recognise they've had it much easier than the generations after them will, and are happy to bear the greater portion of the inevitable tax rises to keep public finances afloat. I'm almost as sure that they're outweighed by those who simply won't countenance supporting any party that threatens to raise their personal tax bill by a single farthing.
The problem for the Tories is that they rely on working age people to get a majority. It can't be repeated enough on here that in 2017 the average age of voting conservative was 55 and Theresa May lost the majority while in 2019 that crossover age went down to 39. The Tories won a plurality or majority of voters in all age groups from 40+ and were very competitive for 30-39 year olds as well.
Judging by my friends, family and colleagues around my age this is the single most toxic policy any of them have ever seen. The anecdata definitely matches the polling, people fed up of the Tories but not sure where to go. Philip Thompson, Casino Royale, Robert and I all find ourselves in the same position, three of us were Tory members and now none are going to vote for them.
Agreed. My point is, what would the impact have been in the alternate universe where NI was kept as it was, and the tax raid was on the retired?
I'm in a not dissimilar position to the four of you. The question is: who am I going to vote for then, if not the Conservatives? I'm not mad enough to believe that Ed Davey's going into the next election promising to reverse the NI increase. And even if he did, he'd be propping up a Labour government who'd be proposing much bigger tax increases on higher earners. So, in pure expected value terms, Johnson and Sunak have a hell of a long way to go before they stop being my best option. And, I suspect, yours.
Depends if the Orange-bookers win the fight for the LD's soul. The entirety of the economically liberal portion of the population is homeless, so if they go for some unobjectionable middle of the road social stuff and drop the EU flagshagging there could be an opening.
The economically liberal portion of the British population is like 6 or 7 guys, it's an incredibly niche proposition.
If the Westminster hacks are to be believed, plenty of ministers smelt trouble. But they all decided to stick with Bozza. Had any Cabinet.minister resigned over this, they'd be utterly vindicated tonight, and could well have been PM by St Edward's Day. But they're all complicit now. Funny old game, politics.
5 voted against and 39 abstained
Enough for letters to the 1922
The haste that this was rushed through the Commons from being announced to the Cabinet on Monday morning and voted on by Tuesday evening was really unbecoming.
It seems they were afraid that if they paused for breath that it would unravel, but the counterpoint is that if it unravels it has reason to do so and better to do so before you vote on it rather than afterwards.
A less hubristic government could have trailed this properly, seen it go down like a cup of cold sick, then have a rethink instead of committing to it.
Yup, walking this back is going to be extremely difficult which means it won't happen. If the vote was next week the leadership could have taken the temperature of the party over the weekend, seen the polling and then had a rethink on only attacking working people with this tax.
I don't personally think this can be reversed now that the vote has taken place, I guess the leadership may try and conspire to have it kicked back by the HoL and then quietly drop it but I think the reputational damage is done. The Tory party no is no longer the party of low taxes and getting on in life. That is going to vet difficult to shake without new leadership and an actual reversal of it and maybe actually cutting NI.
To my mind this is Boris' poll tax moment. The Tory party dumped Mrs Thatcher to save the 1992 election, they will need to dump Boris to save 2024 IMO. Labour are heading for 310-320 seats.
I'm not sure about this. The implication seems to be that choosing to raise taxes on working age people rather than the retired was the wrong thing to do (which I agree it definitely was, both morally and fiscally), and therefore the Tories are being punished for it in the polls. I suspect that, in fact, if they'd kept NI where it was but charge it on all pensioner income, the electoral impact would have been far greater.
I'm sure there are plenty of public-spirited pensioners who recognise they've had it much easier than the generations after them will, and are happy to bear the greater portion of the inevitable tax rises to keep public finances afloat. I'm almost as sure that they're outweighed by those who simply won't countenance supporting any party that threatens to raise their personal tax bill by a single farthing.
The problem for the Tories is that they rely on working age people to get a majority. It can't be repeated enough on here that in 2017 the average age of voting conservative was 55 and Theresa May lost the majority while in 2019 that crossover age went down to 39. The Tories won a plurality or majority of voters in all age groups from 40+ and were very competitive for 30-39 year olds as well.
Judging by my friends, family and colleagues around my age this is the single most toxic policy any of them have ever seen. The anecdata definitely matches the polling, people fed up of the Tories but not sure where to go. Philip Thompson, Casino Royale, Robert and I all find ourselves in the same position, three of us were Tory members and now none are going to vote for them.
Agreed. My point is, what would the impact have been in the alternate universe where NI was kept as it was, and the tax raid was on the retired?
I'm in a not dissimilar position to the four of you. The question is: who am I going to vote for then, if not the Conservatives? I'm not mad enough to believe that Ed Davey's going into the next election promising to reverse the NI increase. And even if he did, he'd be propping up a Labour government who'd be proposing much bigger tax increases on higher earners. So, in pure expected value terms, Johnson and Sunak have a hell of a long way to go before they stop being my best option. And, I suspect, yours.
Depends if the Orange-bookers win the fight for the LD's soul. The entirety of the economically liberal portion of the population is homeless, so if they go for some unobjectionable middle of the road social stuff and drop the EU flagshagging there could be an opening.
The economically liberal portion of the British population is like 6 or 7 guys, it's an incredibly niche proposition.
I suppose we ought to be pleased that we had about 11 years of economic liberalism between 1979 and 1990. Most Tory voters at the time were probably not big supporters of it.
OT that reminds me. In the words of the great Noddy Holder, it's Christmas. Christmas novelties for cats and dogs are on sale in Sainsbury's. Other supermarkets are available.
Stock up early, logistics only getting worse...
Indeed I have a large joint of gammon in the freezer from last years cancelled Christmas, a large frozen chicken and some well aged Christmas pudding.
If the Westminster hacks are to be believed, plenty of ministers smelt trouble. But they all decided to stick with Bozza. Had any Cabinet.minister resigned over this, they'd be utterly vindicated tonight, and could well have been PM by St Edward's Day. But they're all complicit now. Funny old game, politics.
5 voted against and 39 abstained
Enough for letters to the 1922
The haste that this was rushed through the Commons from being announced to the Cabinet on Monday morning and voted on by Tuesday evening was really unbecoming.
It seems they were afraid that if they paused for breath that it would unravel, but the counterpoint is that if it unravels it has reason to do so and better to do so before you vote on it rather than afterwards.
A less hubristic government could have trailed this properly, seen it go down like a cup of cold sick, then have a rethink instead of committing to it.
Yup, walking this back is going to be extremely difficult which means it won't happen. If the vote was next week the leadership could have taken the temperature of the party over the weekend, seen the polling and then had a rethink on only attacking working people with this tax.
I don't personally think this can be reversed now that the vote has taken place, I guess the leadership may try and conspire to have it kicked back by the HoL and then quietly drop it but I think the reputational damage is done. The Tory party no is no longer the party of low taxes and getting on in life. That is going to vet difficult to shake without new leadership and an actual reversal of it and maybe actually cutting NI.
To my mind this is Boris' poll tax moment. The Tory party dumped Mrs Thatcher to save the 1992 election, they will need to dump Boris to save 2024 IMO. Labour are heading for 310-320 seats.
I'm not sure about this. The implication seems to be that choosing to raise taxes on working age people rather than the retired was the wrong thing to do (which I agree it definitely was, both morally and fiscally), and therefore the Tories are being punished for it in the polls. I suspect that, in fact, if they'd kept NI where it was but charge it on all pensioner income, the electoral impact would have been far greater.
I'm sure there are plenty of public-spirited pensioners who recognise they've had it much easier than the generations after them will, and are happy to bear the greater portion of the inevitable tax rises to keep public finances afloat. I'm almost as sure that they're outweighed by those who simply won't countenance supporting any party that threatens to raise their personal tax bill by a single farthing.
The problem for the Tories is that they rely on working age people to get a majority. It can't be repeated enough on here that in 2017 the average age of voting conservative was 55 and Theresa May lost the majority while in 2019 that crossover age went down to 39. The Tories won a plurality or majority of voters in all age groups from 40+ and were very competitive for 30-39 year olds as well.
Judging by my friends, family and colleagues around my age this is the single most toxic policy any of them have ever seen. The anecdata definitely matches the polling, people fed up of the Tories but not sure where to go. Philip Thompson, Casino Royale, Robert and I all find ourselves in the same position, three of us were Tory members and now none are going to vote for them.
Agreed. My point is, what would the impact have been in the alternate universe where NI was kept as it was, and the tax raid was on the retired?
I'm in a not dissimilar position to the four of you. The question is: who am I going to vote for then, if not the Conservatives? I'm not mad enough to believe that Ed Davey's going into the next election promising to reverse the NI increase. And even if he did, he'd be propping up a Labour government who'd be proposing much bigger tax increases on higher earners. So, in pure expected value terms, Johnson and Sunak have a hell of a long way to go before they stop being my best option. And, I suspect, yours.
Depends if the Orange-bookers win the fight for the LD's soul. The entirety of the economically liberal portion of the population is homeless, so if they go for some unobjectionable middle of the road social stuff and drop the EU flagshagging there could be an opening.
Ed Davey is an original Orange Booker. He wrote the chapter "Liberalism and Localism".
LDs will be a pro European party though, not least because resisting Brexit doubled the membership, almost all of whom were active Remainers. LD policy at the next election will be much closer alignment to the EU on customs and standards, which will mean EEA in effect. The time is not yet ripe to Rejoin.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
If she wins the US Open I can't see her not being Spoty. Good chance even if she doesn't. It's the biggest Brit sporting story for ages.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
If she wins the US Open I can't see her not being Spoty. Good chance even if she doesn't. It's the biggest Brit sporting story for ages.
I think she could be world number one for 10 years. She's that good.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
If she wins the US Open I can't see her not being Spoty. Good chance even if she doesn't. It's the biggest Brit sporting story for ages.
It really is. She's obviously a lovely personality, which ought to be a factor but evidently isn't always (no names). Given what happened at Wimbledon with the media pressure, this is such a wonderful story.
But maybe more than either of those is simply her tennis which has been incredible. I love her attitude out there and she seems to be really happy in the US, free from the intense hype she had here.
I'm not blaming the UK press though. It was all post-lockdown euphoria and we were looking for a feel good story, which Emma was giving us. She wasn't prepared for it back in July. Now she really seems to be in the right place with some very good, wise, heads around her.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
If she wins the US Open I can't see her not being Spoty. Good chance even if she doesn't. It's the biggest Brit sporting story for ages.
Emma certainly has a chance and will surely be nominated but the SPotY market is thin and overreacts to recent events.
Betfair price graphs show the following traded below 3.5 (or 5/2 in old money):- Jason Kenny, last matched at 19.5 Laura Kenny, last matched at 55 Lewis Hamilton, last matched at 44 Mark Cavendish, last matched at 60
So that's at least four candidates who traded short but are now out with the washing.
The US Open takes place in the middle of the night on a fringe internet channel rather than proper telly. Who will have seen it? Against that, it would be no surprise to see Raducanu pick up some tv advertising. So it's possible but remember Andy Murray, who has won SPotY three times. In 2012 Murray won gold at the London Olympics as well as the US Open. He did not win SPotY until the following year when he won Wimbledon.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
If she wins the US Open I can't see her not being Spoty. Good chance even if she doesn't. It's the biggest Brit sporting story for ages.
I think she could be world number one for 10 years. She's that good.
And she is around as the Williams sisters' dominance has ended.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
If the Westminster hacks are to be believed, plenty of ministers smelt trouble. But they all decided to stick with Bozza. Had any Cabinet.minister resigned over this, they'd be utterly vindicated tonight, and could well have been PM by St Edward's Day. But they're all complicit now. Funny old game, politics.
5 voted against and 39 abstained
Enough for letters to the 1922
The haste that this was rushed through the Commons from being announced to the Cabinet on Monday morning and voted on by Tuesday evening was really unbecoming.
It seems they were afraid that if they paused for breath that it would unravel, but the counterpoint is that if it unravels it has reason to do so and better to do so before you vote on it rather than afterwards.
A less hubristic government could have trailed this properly, seen it go down like a cup of cold sick, then have a rethink instead of committing to it.
Yup, walking this back is going to be extremely difficult which means it won't happen. If the vote was next week the leadership could have taken the temperature of the party over the weekend, seen the polling and then had a rethink on only attacking working people with this tax.
I don't personally think this can be reversed now that the vote has taken place, I guess the leadership may try and conspire to have it kicked back by the HoL and then quietly drop it but I think the reputational damage is done. The Tory party no is no longer the party of low taxes and getting on in life. That is going to vet difficult to shake without new leadership and an actual reversal of it and maybe actually cutting NI.
To my mind this is Boris' poll tax moment. The Tory party dumped Mrs Thatcher to save the 1992 election, they will need to dump Boris to save 2024 IMO. Labour are heading for 310-320 seats.
I'm not sure about this. The implication seems to be that choosing to raise taxes on working age people rather than the retired was the wrong thing to do (which I agree it definitely was, both morally and fiscally), and therefore the Tories are being punished for it in the polls. I suspect that, in fact, if they'd kept NI where it was but charge it on all pensioner income, the electoral impact would have been far greater.
I'm sure there are plenty of public-spirited pensioners who recognise they've had it much easier than the generations after them will, and are happy to bear the greater portion of the inevitable tax rises to keep public finances afloat. I'm almost as sure that they're outweighed by those who simply won't countenance supporting any party that threatens to raise their personal tax bill by a single farthing.
The problem for the Tories is that they rely on working age people to get a majority. It can't be repeated enough on here that in 2017 the average age of voting conservative was 55 and Theresa May lost the majority while in 2019 that crossover age went down to 39. The Tories won a plurality or majority of voters in all age groups from 40+ and were very competitive for 30-39 year olds as well.
Judging by my friends, family and colleagues around my age this is the single most toxic policy any of them have ever seen. The anecdata definitely matches the polling, people fed up of the Tories but not sure where to go. Philip Thompson, Casino Royale, Robert and I all find ourselves in the same position, three of us were Tory members and now none are going to vote for them.
Agreed. My point is, what would the impact have been in the alternate universe where NI was kept as it was, and the tax raid was on the retired?
I'm in a not dissimilar position to the four of you. The question is: who am I going to vote for then, if not the Conservatives? I'm not mad enough to believe that Ed Davey's going into the next election promising to reverse the NI increase. And even if he did, he'd be propping up a Labour government who'd be proposing much bigger tax increases on higher earners. So, in pure expected value terms, Johnson and Sunak have a hell of a long way to go before they stop being my best option. And, I suspect, yours.
Depends if the Orange-bookers win the fight for the LD's soul. The entirety of the economically liberal portion of the population is homeless, so if they go for some unobjectionable middle of the road social stuff and drop the EU flagshagging there could be an opening.
Ed Davey is an original Orange Booker. He wrote the chapter "Liberalism and Localism".
LDs will be a pro European party though, not least because resisting Brexit doubled the membership, almost all of whom were active Remainers. LD policy at the next election will be much closer alignment to the EU on customs and standards, which will mean EEA in effect. The time is not yet ripe to Rejoin.
But they need to position it as "sorting out the crisis on the supermarket shelves" - pragmatism not ideology. They have a huge opportunity if they can avoid sounding like preachy, I-told-you-sos. I.e. they need to "stop the EU flagshagging" to get what they want.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Probably, though they’re quite a bit older than Selas and Capriati who had a combined age of 32 when they met in the 1991 US Open semi final.
If the Westminster hacks are to be believed, plenty of ministers smelt trouble. But they all decided to stick with Bozza. Had any Cabinet.minister resigned over this, they'd be utterly vindicated tonight, and could well have been PM by St Edward's Day. But they're all complicit now. Funny old game, politics.
5 voted against and 39 abstained
Enough for letters to the 1922
The haste that this was rushed through the Commons from being announced to the Cabinet on Monday morning and voted on by Tuesday evening was really unbecoming.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
How many seats will they contest? For months people have been combining the Labour and Green vote, yet they deluded themselves into thinking this is anything other than mid-term noise.
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
Unknown. The article only lists the Lab/Con figures and some other questions about the NI tax rise itself, and the tweet adds the LD figure only.
This is something that really boils my piss. By not showing the full poll, it helps stir up a narrative that this is bad for the government but actually I think it’s terrible for Starmer.
@TheScreamingEagles - is this something that could be raised with the polling council? If I only released half my stats at 09:30 on the dot I’d be getting a bollocking.
Completely batty! In a two horse race if one falls of course it's good for the other!
If the Westminster hacks are to be believed, plenty of ministers smelt trouble. But they all decided to stick with Bozza. Had any Cabinet.minister resigned over this, they'd be utterly vindicated tonight, and could well have been PM by St Edward's Day. But they're all complicit now. Funny old game, politics.
5 voted against and 39 abstained
Enough for letters to the 1922
The haste that this was rushed through the Commons from being announced to the Cabinet on Monday morning and voted on by Tuesday evening was really unbecoming.
It seems they were afraid that if they paused for breath that it would unravel, but the counterpoint is that if it unravels it has reason to do so and better to do so before you vote on it rather than afterwards.
A less hubristic government could have trailed this properly, seen it go down like a cup of cold sick, then have a rethink instead of committing to it.
Yup, walking this back is going to be extremely difficult which means it won't happen. If the vote was next week the leadership could have taken the temperature of the party over the weekend, seen the polling and then had a rethink on only attacking working people with this tax.
I don't personally think this can be reversed now that the vote has taken place, I guess the leadership may try and conspire to have it kicked back by the HoL and then quietly drop it but I think the reputational damage is done. The Tory party no is no longer the party of low taxes and getting on in life. That is going to vet difficult to shake without new leadership and an actual reversal of it and maybe actually cutting NI.
To my mind this is Boris' poll tax moment. The Tory party dumped Mrs Thatcher to save the 1992 election, they will need to dump Boris to save 2024 IMO. Labour are heading for 310-320 seats.
I'm not sure about this. The implication seems to be that choosing to raise taxes on working age people rather than the retired was the wrong thing to do (which I agree it definitely was, both morally and fiscally), and therefore the Tories are being punished for it in the polls. I suspect that, in fact, if they'd kept NI where it was but charge it on all pensioner income, the electoral impact would have been far greater.
I'm sure there are plenty of public-spirited pensioners who recognise they've had it much easier than the generations after them will, and are happy to bear the greater portion of the inevitable tax rises to keep public finances afloat. I'm almost as sure that they're outweighed by those who simply won't countenance supporting any party that threatens to raise their personal tax bill by a single farthing.
The problem for the Tories is that they rely on working age people to get a majority. It can't be repeated enough on here that in 2017 the average age of voting conservative was 55 and Theresa May lost the majority while in 2019 that crossover age went down to 39. The Tories won a plurality or majority of voters in all age groups from 40+ and were very competitive for 30-39 year olds as well.
Judging by my friends, family and colleagues around my age this is the single most toxic policy any of them have ever seen. The anecdata definitely matches the polling, people fed up of the Tories but not sure where to go. Philip Thompson, Casino Royale, Robert and I all find ourselves in the same position, three of us were Tory members and now none are going to vote for them.
Agreed. My point is, what would the impact have been in the alternate universe where NI was kept as it was, and the tax raid was on the retired?
I'm in a not dissimilar position to the four of you. The question is: who am I going to vote for then, if not the Conservatives? I'm not mad enough to believe that Ed Davey's going into the next election promising to reverse the NI increase. And even if he did, he'd be propping up a Labour government who'd be proposing much bigger tax increases on higher earners. So, in pure expected value terms, Johnson and Sunak have a hell of a long way to go before they stop being my best option. And, I suspect, yours.
Depends if the Orange-bookers win the fight for the LD's soul. The entirety of the economically liberal portion of the population is homeless, so if they go for some unobjectionable middle of the road social stuff and drop the EU flagshagging there could be an opening.
Ed Davey is an original Orange Booker. He wrote the chapter "Liberalism and Localism".
LDs will be a pro European party though, not least because resisting Brexit doubled the membership, almost all of whom were active Remainers. LD policy at the next election will be much closer alignment to the EU on customs and standards, which will mean EEA in effect. The time is not yet ripe to Rejoin.
But they need to position it as "sorting out the crisis on the supermarket shelves" - pragmatism not ideology. They have a huge opportunity if they can avoid sounding like preachy, I-told-you-sos. I.e. they need to "stop the EU flagshagging" to get what they want.
Sure pragmatically getting much closer to the EU via EEA is obviously much better. The "flag shagging" is a Tory vice though, and I wouldn't expect Brexiteers to vote LD. We are an internationalist pro-European party. Might pick up the third of the old Tory party that voted Remain though, particularly if the current Tories double down in a Brexity culture war rabbit hole.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
abolishing the house of lords and free broadband were two of their better ones in 2019
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
How many seats will they contest? For months people have been combining the Labour and Green vote, yet they deluded themselves into thinking this is anything other than mid-term noise.
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
If a Tory voter is pissed off because they wanted a low tax party where are they going to go?
If the Westminster hacks are to be believed, plenty of ministers smelt trouble. But they all decided to stick with Bozza. Had any Cabinet.minister resigned over this, they'd be utterly vindicated tonight, and could well have been PM by St Edward's Day. But they're all complicit now. Funny old game, politics.
5 voted against and 39 abstained
Enough for letters to the 1922
The haste that this was rushed through the Commons from being announced to the Cabinet on Monday morning and voted on by Tuesday evening was really unbecoming.
It seems they were afraid that if they paused for breath that it would unravel, but the counterpoint is that if it unravels it has reason to do so and better to do so before you vote on it rather than afterwards.
A less hubristic government could have trailed this properly, seen it go down like a cup of cold sick, then have a rethink instead of committing to it.
Yup, walking this back is going to be extremely difficult which means it won't happen. If the vote was next week the leadership could have taken the temperature of the party over the weekend, seen the polling and then had a rethink on only attacking working people with this tax.
I don't personally think this can be reversed now that the vote has taken place, I guess the leadership may try and conspire to have it kicked back by the HoL and then quietly drop it but I think the reputational damage is done. The Tory party no is no longer the party of low taxes and getting on in life. That is going to vet difficult to shake without new leadership and an actual reversal of it and maybe actually cutting NI.
To my mind this is Boris' poll tax moment. The Tory party dumped Mrs Thatcher to save the 1992 election, they will need to dump Boris to save 2024 IMO. Labour are heading for 310-320 seats.
I'm not sure about this. The implication seems to be that choosing to raise taxes on working age people rather than the retired was the wrong thing to do (which I agree it definitely was, both morally and fiscally), and therefore the Tories are being punished for it in the polls. I suspect that, in fact, if they'd kept NI where it was but charge it on all pensioner income, the electoral impact would have been far greater.
I'm sure there are plenty of public-spirited pensioners who recognise they've had it much easier than the generations after them will, and are happy to bear the greater portion of the inevitable tax rises to keep public finances afloat. I'm almost as sure that they're outweighed by those who simply won't countenance supporting any party that threatens to raise their personal tax bill by a single farthing.
The problem for the Tories is that they rely on working age people to get a majority. It can't be repeated enough on here that in 2017 the average age of voting conservative was 55 and Theresa May lost the majority while in 2019 that crossover age went down to 39. The Tories won a plurality or majority of voters in all age groups from 40+ and were very competitive for 30-39 year olds as well.
Judging by my friends, family and colleagues around my age this is the single most toxic policy any of them have ever seen. The anecdata definitely matches the polling, people fed up of the Tories but not sure where to go. Philip Thompson, Casino Royale, Robert and I all find ourselves in the same position, three of us were Tory members and now none are going to vote for them.
Agreed. My point is, what would the impact have been in the alternate universe where NI was kept as it was, and the tax raid was on the retired?
I'm in a not dissimilar position to the four of you. The question is: who am I going to vote for then, if not the Conservatives? I'm not mad enough to believe that Ed Davey's going into the next election promising to reverse the NI increase. And even if he did, he'd be propping up a Labour government who'd be proposing much bigger tax increases on higher earners. So, in pure expected value terms, Johnson and Sunak have a hell of a long way to go before they stop being my best option. And, I suspect, yours.
Depends if the Orange-bookers win the fight for the LD's soul. The entirety of the economically liberal portion of the population is homeless, so if they go for some unobjectionable middle of the road social stuff and drop the EU flagshagging there could be an opening.
The economically liberal portion of the British population is like 6 or 7 guys, it's an incredibly niche proposition.
I suppose we ought to be pleased that we had about 11 years of economic liberalism between 1979 and 1990. Most Tory voters at the time were probably not big supporters of it.
Support ran out when Maggie ran out of things to sell at a discount, oil revenues stopped paying for tax cuts for the rich and the housing market bubble ran out of air.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
How many seats will they contest? For months people have been combining the Labour and Green vote, yet they deluded themselves into thinking this is anything other than mid-term noise.
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
If a Tory voter is pissed off because they wanted a low tax party where are they going to go?
As @Philip_Thompson suggested earlier on this thread, there is now an opportunity for Labour to seize the low tax mantle, although that might involve Keir Starmer announcing a policy.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
How many seats will they contest? For months people have been combining the Labour and Green vote, yet they deluded themselves into thinking this is anything other than mid-term noise.
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
If a Tory voter is pissed off because they wanted a low tax party where are they going to go?
As @Philip_Thompson suggested earlier on this thread, there is now an opportunity for Labour to seize the low tax mantle, although that might involve Keir Starmer announcing a policy.
Arent they too reliant on Public Sector workers to head down the small government route?
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Probably, though they’re quite a bit older than Selas and Capriati who had a combined age of 32 when they met in the 1991 US Open semi final.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
How many seats will they contest? For months people have been combining the Labour and Green vote, yet they deluded themselves into thinking this is anything other than mid-term noise.
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
If a Tory voter is pissed off because they wanted a low tax party where are they going to go?
As @Philip_Thompson suggested earlier on this thread, there is now an opportunity for Labour to seize the low tax mantle, although that might involve Keir Starmer announcing a policy.
Wouldn’t it be something if the Labour Party once again became the party of workers! You know, labour. Not holding my breath…
Meanwhile some of you may recall I tipped Raducanu at SPOTY at 20-1. A shame I can’t remember my betfair login…
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
How many seats will they contest? For months people have been combining the Labour and Green vote, yet they deluded themselves into thinking this is anything other than mid-term noise.
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
If a Tory voter is pissed off because they wanted a low tax party where are they going to go?
As @Philip_Thompson suggested earlier on this thread, there is now an opportunity for Labour to seize the low tax mantle, although that might involve Keir Starmer announcing a policy.
Wouldn’t it be something if the Labour Party once again became the party of workers! You know, labour. Not holding my breath…
Meanwhile some of you may recall I tipped Raducanu at SPOTY at 20-1. A shame I can’t remember my betfair login…
I think I may have been the first on here to mention her name in connection with SPOTY - last Saturday afternoon, ahead of the Tormo match.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
How many seats will they contest? For months people have been combining the Labour and Green vote, yet they deluded themselves into thinking this is anything other than mid-term noise.
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
If a Tory voter is pissed off because they wanted a low tax party where are they going to go?
As @Philip_Thompson suggested earlier on this thread, there is now an opportunity for Labour to seize the low tax mantle, although that might involve Keir Starmer announcing a policy.
Arent they too reliant on Public Sector workers to head down the small government route?
Who said anything about small government? There is certainly room to cancel the NI increase because we've done without it up to now. There is probably room to cut the base (not higher) rate of income tax and/or VAT (using our post-Brexit freedom). The aim would be to stimulate economic growth, not choke it off with tax rises and spending cuts.
@TOPPING, @Sandpit yes, i had a 993 GT. i bought it suspiciously cheaply in Moscow when I lived there. flew it to Cyprus (super cheap air freight ex SVO on a haggard Il-76) because we didnt have secure parking in Moscow but it got nicked in Cyprus anyway and trashed so I parted it out. i made ok money on it but i would have been far better off keeping it. i've still got the rear wing and that now is on my 993 Carrera slicktop.
the 993 is the best 911 for the road but the gt is the worst 993 for the road. it had big fixed vane geometry turbos and would drop out of boost and lag if you werent very fucking committed.
one handed typing is a pain in the dick
Great story. Yes, you should definitely have kept it! Of course it’s crap on the road, it’s a Le Mans homologation special, only has number plates because they were a requirement!
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
I wouldn't be surprised if REFUK are on 10% within 6 months.
What does it tell us, politically? Conservatives have alienated supporters but Labour remain unconvincing so is RefUK really NOTA or is there something Brexity going on? Earlier in this thread @IanB2 suggested pet-owners were frustrated by post-Brexit problems, and there are also empty shelves in supermarkets.
The government announced tax rises this week. This clearly upset some people who had previously been saying Con to the pollsters. But it’s clear that Labour aren’t capitalising as they might have.
While a vote switching to Labour or Lib Dem is twice as good as a switch to REFUK*, it all helps demolish that Tory majority.
*do they even have policies?
How many seats will they contest? For months people have been combining the Labour and Green vote, yet they deluded themselves into thinking this is anything other than mid-term noise.
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
If a Tory voter is pissed off because they wanted a low tax party where are they going to go?
As @Philip_Thompson suggested earlier on this thread, there is now an opportunity for Labour to seize the low tax mantle, although that might involve Keir Starmer announcing a policy.
Arent they too reliant on Public Sector workers to head down the small government route?
Who said anything about small government? There is certainly room to cancel the NI increase because we've done without it up to now. There is probably room to cut the base (not higher) rate of income tax and/or VAT (using our post-Brexit freedom). The aim would be to stimulate economic growth, not choke it off with tax rises and spending cuts.
The beauty from the Labour Party point of view is that there will be significant benefit to the national coffers from the tax rise over the next two years, so there will be scope for Reeves to remove it in a post 2024 GE budget.
The amount going into social care is trivial before October 2023.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Boris Becker must be one.
Incidentally, here’s a paradox. He wasn’t seeded in 1985, qualifying by virtue of being Queen’s champion. But nor is he counted as a wildcard (they came a bit later).
So does he count as a qualifier who became a champion or not?
That's Florida hit the UK equivalent of a thousand deaths a day on their "day of death" data. Assuming they track their cases data like the last two peaks they have about a week and a half of this levels of deaths to go.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Boris Becker, Pete Sampras, and three other men? ETA Nadal maybe? I'm thinking multiple winners must have started young given 25 is pretty much the upper limit these days.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Boris Becker must be one.
Incidentally, here’s a paradox. He wasn’t seeded in 1985, qualifying by virtue of being Queen’s champion. But nor is he counted as a wildcard (they came a bit later).
So does he count as a qualifier who became a champion or not?
Tracy Austin, Sharapova I’d have thought. Possibly Stefan Edberg and Ivan Lendl too?
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Boris Becker must be one.
Incidentally, here’s a paradox. He wasn’t seeded in 1985, qualifying by virtue of being Queen’s champion. But nor is he counted as a wildcard (they came a bit later).
So does he count as a qualifier who became a champion or not?
Correct he is there. 7th on list. And yes I was wondering that earlier this week because I thought he might have been a qualifier, but wasnt.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Boris Becker, Pete Sampras, and three other men? ETA Nadal maybe? I'm thinking multiple winners must have started young given 25 is pretty much the upper limit these days.
Construction fell but anecdotally, you can't find builders for love nor money. Some EU builders will have been lost to Brexit, of course, but are the official statistics missing cash-in-hand domestic work while large sites lay idle?
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Boris Becker must be one.
Incidentally, here’s a paradox. He wasn’t seeded in 1985, qualifying by virtue of being Queen’s champion. But nor is he counted as a wildcard (they came a bit later).
So does he count as a qualifier who became a champion or not?
Tracy Austin, Sharapova I’d have thought. Possibly Stefan Edberg and Ivan Lendl too?
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Boris Becker must be one.
Incidentally, here’s a paradox. He wasn’t seeded in 1985, qualifying by virtue of being Queen’s champion. But nor is he counted as a wildcard (they came a bit later).
So does he count as a qualifier who became a champion or not?
Correct he is there. 7th on list. And yes I was wondering that earlier this week because I thought he might have been a qualifier, but wasnt.
Maureen Connolly??? (Edit And Maria Bueno???)
And Good morning. Warm & sunny morning, and the forecast of thunderstorms seems to have been downgraded to heavy showers. Shame, in a way; haven't seen a good storm for ages.
Construction fell but anecdotally, you can't find builders for love nor money. Some EU builders will have been lost to Brexit, of course, but are the official statistics missing cash-in-hand domestic work while large sites lay idle?
It may well be Labour shortages in construction as well as shortages of components.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Boris Becker must be one.
Incidentally, here’s a paradox. He wasn’t seeded in 1985, qualifying by virtue of being Queen’s champion. But nor is he counted as a wildcard (they came a bit later).
So does he count as a qualifier who became a champion or not?
Correct he is there. 7th on list. And yes I was wondering that earlier this week because I thought he might have been a qualifier, but wasnt.
Maureen Connolly???
And Good morning. Warm & sunny morning, and the forecast of thunderstorms seems to have been downgraded to heavy showers. Shame, in a way; haven't seen a good storm for ages.
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Michael Chang. I have cheated though because I was reading an article about youngest Grand Slam winners yesterday.
For some reason he is the only name that stuck with me!
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Maybe 1989 Roland Garros. Sanchez Vicariio was 17 when she won and Graf was 19 or 20 I think.
It was days before her (Graf's) 20th birthday... We may therefore need to go into the months of all the players to work out who was youngest
Sanchez was 17 years 174 days according to the top 10 youngest grand slam winners page I just looked on. What really surprised me is there are 5 men on that list. Unthinkable today.
Anyone want to have a go at naming the 10? 5 men 5 women.
Michael Chang. I have cheated though because I was reading an article about youngest Grand Slam winners yesterday.
For some reason he is the only name that stuck with me!
Construction fell but anecdotally, you can't find builders for love nor money. Some EU builders will have been lost to Brexit, of course, but are the official statistics missing cash-in-hand domestic work while large sites lay idle?
Construction shot up this time last year, and you certainly can’t get a decent builder without a long wait. Maybe some of them have made so much this last twelve months that they can afford to retire?
When the last Lab govn introduced a tax rise to pay for NHS it’s poll lead increased.. but it had spent 6 months clearing the ground, did not pretend it was to pay for social care and had not ruled out NI rise at the election. https://twitter.com/steverichards14/status/1436217436500631552
Construction fell but anecdotally, you can't find builders for love nor money. Some EU builders will have been lost to Brexit, of course, but are the official statistics missing cash-in-hand domestic work while large sites lay idle?
Construction shot up this time last year, and you certainly can’t get a decent builder without a long wait. Maybe some of them have made so much this last twelve months that they can afford to retire?
Probably two different types of workers? Day laborers on big construction sites vs. builders who do homes?
*First qualifier in history to reach a Grand Slam final *Lowest ranked woman to do so *Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set *First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977 *The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
There has to be a reasonable possibility that Raducanu and Fernandez will be trading the womens tennis number one spot for the next decade.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
Iva Majoli was 19 when she beat 16 year old Martina Hingis in 1997 French Open final
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
LOL. Keep laying whoever just won. It’s done me well so far, and great to see a new name making everyone else go longer than previously.
Incorrect, UK isn’t the first country to mix and match vaccines. UAE is already giving Pfizer booster shots, to those who received Sinopharm earlier in the year.
Incorrect, UK isn’t the first country to mix and match vaccines. UAE is already giving Pfizer booster shots, to those who received Sinopharm earlier in the year.
The UK is the first country to mix and match vaccines. UAE is giving Pfizer booster shots to those who received Sinopharm earlier in the year. 😉
Incorrect, UK isn’t the first country to mix and match vaccines. UAE is already giving Pfizer booster shots, to those who received Sinopharm earlier in the year.
Okay then: the headline should be: "UK is preparing to become the first country to "mix and match" working coronavirus vaccines through its booster programme."
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
LOL. Keep laying whoever just won. It’s done me well so far, and great to see a new name making everyone else go longer than previously.
I’m not sure we can take much from results on Tyneside. We need Durham and Northumberland by elections.
What are you suggesting? (If you are a local councillor in Durham or Northumberland, don't have nightmares.)
In reference to last night’s by election results (including my own ward), just that Tyneside isn’t a great indicator on the state of the red wall in of itself.
Incorrect, UK isn’t the first country to mix and match vaccines. UAE is already giving Pfizer booster shots, to those who received Sinopharm earlier in the year.
The UK is the first country to mix and match vaccines. UAE is giving Pfizer booster shots to those who received Sinopharm earlier in the year. 😉
Sinopharm is the OK Chinese one. Sinovac is the total dud that China paid off the WHO to approve mysteriously got 51% efficacy in trials and is now being pushed hard in Africa.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
LOL. Keep laying whoever just won. It’s done me well so far, and great to see a new name making everyone else go longer than previously.
liking that strategy. very much.
As @DecrepiterJohnL pointed out upthread, the SPoTY market over-reacts to the news, doubly so during the Olympics.
We haven’t even seen the shortlist yet, so many of those who were favourite at some point might end up as non-runners.
The betting has Emma Raducanu favourite 1.8 vs 2.2 Leylah Fernandez on Betfair. Emma has been the outsider in her quarter-final and semi-final matches.
Emma Raducanu is now favourite for SPotY. Betfair prices:- 2.2 Emma Raducanu 2.48 Tom Daley 8.2 Jason Kenny 8.2 Adam Peaty 15 Lewis Hamilton 26 bar
LOL. Keep laying whoever just won. It’s done me well so far, and great to see a new name making everyone else go longer than previously.
Laying the favourite is a strategy that deteriorates the closer to the result in time that we get to the actual contest. In the end the favourite is the one to back.
This isn't something that I plan to bet on, but what further contenders could emerge?
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
14% for the Greens and RefUK on this Yougov would be the highest vote for parties outside the big 3 of Tory, Labour and LD since 2015.
9% would be the highest Green vote ever at a general election and 5% for REF would be the second highest vote for a party right of the Tories at a general election after the 12% UKIP got in 2015.
The main shift is therefore not Tory to Labour but Tory to LD and REF and with some shift from Labour to Green since 2019 too
Okay then: the headline should be: "UK is preparing to become the first country to "mix and match" working coronavirus vaccines through its booster programme."
What? Canada did mix-n-match of AZ and Pfizer for 1st and 2nd doses starting in June or thereabouts.
Comments
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/58496283
I’m not saying it’s a huge effect - but I do think it’s there, beneath the noise.
2.2 Emma Raducanu
2.48 Tom Daley
8.2 Jason Kenny
8.2 Adam Peaty
15 Lewis Hamilton
26 bar
Indeed I have a large joint of gammon in the freezer from last years cancelled Christmas, a large frozen chicken and some well aged Christmas pudding.
LDs will be a pro European party though, not least because resisting Brexit doubled the membership, almost all of whom were active Remainers. LD policy at the next election will be much closer alignment to the EU on customs and standards, which will mean EEA in effect. The time is not yet ripe to Rejoin.
Absolutely incredible.
And a Labour poll lead. I feel a warm glow.
But maybe more than either of those is simply her tennis which has been incredible. I love her attitude out there and she seems to be really happy in the US, free from the intense hype she had here.
I'm not blaming the UK press though. It was all post-lockdown euphoria and we were looking for a feel good story, which Emma was giving us. She wasn't prepared for it back in July. Now she really seems to be in the right place with some very good, wise, heads around her.
Bloody marvellous innit?!
When asked about her chances in the final, she added: "Is there any expectation? I'm a qualifier so technically there's no pressure on me."
Betfair price graphs show the following traded below 3.5 (or 5/2 in old money):-
Jason Kenny, last matched at 19.5
Laura Kenny, last matched at 55
Lewis Hamilton, last matched at 44
Mark Cavendish, last matched at 60
So that's at least four candidates who traded short but are now out with the washing.
The US Open takes place in the middle of the night on a fringe internet channel rather than proper telly. Who will have seen it? Against that, it would be no surprise to see Raducanu pick up some tv advertising. So it's possible but remember Andy Murray, who has won SPotY three times. In 2012 Murray won gold at the London Olympics as well as the US Open. He did not win SPotY until the following year when he won Wimbledon.
Opros Politics
@OprosUK
Replying to
@OprosUK
GRN: 9% (-1)
REF: 5% (+2)
*Also highest REF/BXP have polled since December 2020*
And here’s why the whole result wasn’t announced last night.
Utterly disgraceful.
*Lowest ranked woman to do so
*Won all nine matches (three qualifiers and six in the main draw) without dropping a set
*First British woman in a major final since Virginia Wade in 1977
*The final as a whole will be the first singles final in the open era to feature two unseeded players
I wouldn't get too overexcited about the outright win - Leylah Fernandez may have had to fight harder to get to the final, but she has been playing magnificently and has beaten Osaka, Kerber, Svitolina and Sabalenka in back-to-back matches, so I would make her the favourite - but Raducanu does have a realistic chance of doing this.
Personally I'll miss the final because I'm away at the weekend and have a long day planned on Sunday, otherwise I'd sit up to watch. If these two play up to their potential it's going to be a cracker.
My question: the two finalists have a combined age of just 37 years old. Is this a record low for a Grand Slam final?
*do they even have policies?
The Tories could lose the next election (i.e. be out of office), but that poll changes nothing.
Meanwhile some of you may recall I tipped Raducanu at SPOTY at 20-1. A shame I can’t remember my betfair login…
The amount going into social care is trivial before October 2023.
Incidentally, here’s a paradox. He wasn’t seeded in 1985, qualifying by virtue of being Queen’s champion. But nor is he counted as a wildcard (they came a bit later).
So does he count as a qualifier who became a champion or not?
▪️ services showed 0.0% growth (2.1% below peak)
▪️ production grew 1.2% (2.1% below peak)
▪️ construction fell 1.6% (1.8% below peak)
➡️ https://t.co/hMWVf8oScb https://t.co/EyTHxBfTeW
https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1436208244838514688?s=19
And Good morning. Warm & sunny morning, and the forecast of thunderstorms seems to have been downgraded to heavy showers.
Shame, in a way; haven't seen a good storm for ages.
1.
2.
3. Austin
4. Sharapova
5.
6.
7. Becker
8.
9.
10.
For some reason he is the only name that stuck with me!
https://twitter.com/steverichards14/status/1436217436500631552
"PM Johnson in Britain has been forced to impose a very large tax increase for the UK to pay for the revenue losses of Brexit"
https://twitter.com/archer_rs/status/1435900669286813696
Senior government figures believe those who received AZ earlier this year will be get Pfizer.
Latest w @SarahNev @mroliverbarnes https://www.ft.com/content/a03b8c21-7412-460f-9196-8c41ac80c6eb
(If you are a local councillor in Durham or Northumberland, don't have nightmares.)
We haven’t even seen the shortlist yet, so many of those who were favourite at some point might end up as non-runners.
This isn't something that I plan to bet on, but what further contenders could emerge?
*in theory*, people are willing to pay more tax for the NHS and social care. In practice, hell no!
9% would be the highest Green vote ever at a general election and 5% for REF would be the second highest vote for a party right of the Tories at a general election after the 12% UKIP got in 2015.
The main shift is therefore not Tory to Labour but Tory to LD and REF and with some shift from Labour to Green since 2019 too