politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Alastair Meeks looking ahead to the GE2020
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Alastair Meeks looking ahead to the GE2020
We’ve been here before. We languish under a Conservative government with a tiny majority, distracted by a frenzied and incomprehensible internal argument being conducted in raised voices over the EU (a subject about which the public largely do not care), staggering from wholly avoidable crisis to wholly avoidable crisis. The public rightly see the Conservative party as horribly divided. Di…
Comments
-
Whatever.0
-
test0
-
Wow, on the 4th try I'm in.0
-
I remember going across the Middlesbrough transporter bridge when I was a child.0
-
Jeremy Corbyn has not exactly yet achieved universal acclaim as a natural leader and a large part of his Parliamentary party is in more or less open mutiny against him (or, as the leader’s own camp would put it, “core group negative” or “hostile”).
Lovely sarcasm there Alistair.
As in, 'Stalin was not overfond of kulaks.'0 -
If you're not worried about losing money and want pure value on GOP: Back Trump - http://election.princeton.edu/2016/04/09/current-polls-favor-a-trump-delegate-majority/
If you're a wuss like me, cover Cruz too - he is fair value, but Trump is good Value0 -
I find this makes a lot of sense, generally. Some Tories thought the referendum campaign would be civilised in terms of Tory disagreements, and while it could have been worse, there's plenty to fuel ongoing trouble already, and only going to get worse as well. In short, those Tories were wrong.
Other Tories, possibly the same ones, expect or hope things will quiet down after June, but like Mr Meeks I doubt that - as he notes, the number of irreconcilables does not need to be high to cause major trouble throughout the parliament, and that will only add further fuel to the leadership troubles.
Boundary changes? I can see it being a flashpoint, but I'm so sick of that issue I must say - the boundaries need to be updated, just f---ing get on with it already.
Tory complacency remains very high. That does not worry me so long as Labour improve and offer a credible alternative - credible as far as I'm concerned at any rate - but with Corbyn looking solid off the back of a mayoral win to come and a local election campaign his team have managed expectations on, that doesn't look likely any time soon. And yet if the Tories are crap enough even Corbynite Labour may seem attractive, particularly as the economic accomplishments of the Tories will probably not look so grand come 2020, given failures to date.
So yes, the Tories are not bombproof. We can only hope whoever replaces Cameron this year or next is able to keep them vaguely credible, so we have at least one such option. Voting without even one of those will not be easy.0 -
In a previous thread today, some PBers were talking about how drab and manky Clacton on Sea is. However I remember this sea-side town in all it's dazzling glory in 1938; I was 4 years old and loving every minute of it, from the sands to the evening shows on the pier that my parents took me to. Funny old thing is memory-I remember that holiday better than I remember last week.Tim_B said:I remember going across the Middlesbrough transporter bridge when I was a child.
0 -
While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?0 -
Colin Montgomery is a national and European treasure. His Ryder Cup heroics are legendary.0
-
Trump 2016, Cruz 2020 is my guessPulpstar said:If you're not worried about losing money and want pure value on GOP: Back Trump - http://election.princeton.edu/2016/04/09/current-polls-favor-a-trump-delegate-majority/
If you're a wuss like me, cover Cruz too - he is fair value, but Trump is good Value0 -
Whereas with my current problems I can remember last week better than I can the last minute ... ;(MikeK said:
In a previous thread today, some PBers were talking about how drab and manky Clacton on Sea is. However I remember this sea-side town in all it's dazzling glory in 1938; I was 4 years old and loving every minute of it, from the sands to the evening shows on the pier that my parents took me to. Funny old thing is memory-I remember that holiday better than I remember last week.Tim_B said:I remember going across the Middlesbrough transporter bridge when I was a child.
0 -
I don't think that follows. Even with the referendum going on, there's been plenty of rallying round on non related matters. We'll probably see this again in the Commons tomorrow.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?0 -
Yeah
The medium-term outlook doesn't look good for the tories - evens on NOM would probably be generous and I wouldn't back Con Maj below 2/1.
Realistically though, no serious punters are involved in the betfair market so the prices are artificial and liquidity poor. I'm not sure the bookies even care if they price up a 4/6 shot at 6/4 when the default settlement date is 4 years away.
The odds will be out of line for a while.0 -
Boris on Sadiq Khan
In Islam and the Labour Party there is a struggle going on, and in both cases Khan – whatever his real views – is pandering to the extremists. I don’t want him running our capital.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/we-cant-let--the-corbynistas-plant-the-red-flag-back-on-top-of-c/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter0 -
On topic, The Tories are screwed if Labour ditch Corbyn for Dan Jarvis or anyone vaguely electable, basically anyone the Tories cannot characterise as a 'terrorist sympathiser'0
-
Raaaaaaaaaaacist......TheScreamingEagles said:Boris on Sadiq Khan
In Islam and the Labour Party there is a struggle going on, and in both cases Khan – whatever his real views – is pandering to the extremists. I don’t want him running our capital.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/10/we-cant-let--the-corbynistas-plant-the-red-flag-back-on-top-of-c/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter0 -
Labour are screwed because they've betrayed their former core supporters in places like Stoke-on-Trent and piling up huge majorities in the metropolitan cities won't help much.TheScreamingEagles said:On topic, The Tories are screwed if Labour ditch Corbyn for Dan Jarvis or anyone vaguely electable, basically anyone the Tories cannot characterise as a 'terrorist sympathiser'
0 -
The difference to 1992-4 is:
Then they were led by John Smith (succeeded by St. Tone) and Labour were not too far away in seats, facing an exhausted government. They were clearly a government-in-waiting that held no fears for the voters.
Now the alternative presented is Corbyn (or some hard-left successor) propped up by the SNP...
Middle England would rather stick pins in its eyes than risk that.0 -
Fox Pennsylvania
GOP
Trump 48
Kasich 22
Cruz 20
Dems
Clinton 49
Sanders 38
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/10/fox-news-poll-trump-holds-huge-lead-in-pennsylvania-clinton-up-over-sanders.html?intcmp=hpbt20 -
Fox New York
GOP
Trump 54
Kasich 22
Cruz 15
Dems
Clinton 53
Sanders 37
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/10/fox-news-poll-trump-clinton-rule-empire-state.html?intcmp=hpbt20 -
Why is John cleese a member of the hacked off Hugh Grant outrage club? Did I miss the time when the press "did him"?0
-
If EU ref is a narrow Remain the most likely result is a hung parliament with UKIP getting a further increased voteshare0
-
No, there is real trouble brewing on other fronts too.ThreeQuidder said:
I don't think that follows. Even with the referendum going on, there's been plenty of rallying round on non related matters. We'll probably see this again in the Commons tomorrow.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?
The Brexit headbutting is only the warm up to bloodletting over other issues. IDS is not alone.0 -
"Forget about Labour’s heartland, it doesn’t exist — Zoe Williams"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/10/labour-heartland-doesnt-exist-voters0 -
Jarvis is another Javid; all back story and no delivery. He's still cut very much from the 'whinging lefty' cloth; Labour will continue to be a public sector pressure group with him as leader.TheScreamingEagles said:On topic, The Tories are screwed if Labour ditch Corbyn for Dan Jarvis or anyone vaguely electable, basically anyone the Tories cannot characterise as a 'terrorist sympathiser'
0 -
Yadda yadda..
The utube equivalent of the script kiddy virus has arrived.
http://tinyurl.com/z6a2kqr
(the guy who did Putin may need an upgrade to a teapot by Geiger inc .)0 -
It would not take much swing against the blues - to Labour, UKIP or even the LibDems - to be in hung parliament territory. I think the odds on a Labour majority are negligible at present. A change in leadership of Labour, or a major economic crisis could do it though.RodCrosby said:The difference to 1992-4 is:
Then they were led by John Smith (succeeded by St. Tone) and Labour were not too far away in seats, facing an exhausted government. They were clearly a government-in-waiting that held no fears for the voters.
Now the alternative presented is Corbyn (or some hard-left successor) propped up by the SNP...
Middle England would rather stick pins in its eyes than risk that.0 -
Isn't London the Labour heartland?AndyJS said:"Forget about Labour’s heartland, it doesn’t exist — Zoe Williams"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/10/labour-heartland-doesnt-exist-voters0 -
I'm actually struggling to identify what her principle theme is with that piece. There's a lot of stuff about things about politics that are accepted without question, around who to target and how I think, but despite her summary I'm not sure what her answer to those things are, despite the catchy title. Maybe I'm being a bit slow this evening - anyone else have an idea?AndyJS said:"Forget about Labour’s heartland, it doesn’t exist — Zoe Williams"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/10/labour-heartland-doesnt-exist-voters0 -
Speith is being ruthlessly efficient in the masters.0
-
"And after the referendum, everyone forgave and forgot and David Cameron continued on as before," is what the history books will say in two years' time, not0
-
Evening all
We are barely 11 months into a 60 month electoral cycle so thinking about the endgame now ignores the vast amount of water to flow under the bridge.
I do think it's not just a case of Governments losing elections - Oppositions have to win them too and both Feb 1974 and May 2010 are prime examples of the former happening but not necessarily the latter though said Oppositions found their way to Government in the end.
Sometimes you can have a perfectly good Opposition but the Government is simply better and of course there are times when the Government is the only game in town (1966, 1983, 2001 all being good examples).
I'd argue that apart from 1979 (and 1945), most changes in Government have been more about changes in management - that the electorate wanted the same things done but managed by someone else (1964, 1970, 1997) who would do them "better" which translates as kinder, fairer, more efficiently or whatever you like.
The challenges of governing in the 2020s are going to be considerable - simply doing what we did in the 2010s may not be enough - and the Party which offers a positive and credible vision for the provision of that Government is going to be the one that gets the job.0 -
This article needs to be kept for posterity. It looks so wrong in its conclusions.0
-
Interesting hole in one on 16!0
-
Wishful thinking of Lib Dems.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?0 -
Wrong. It depends on who they pick as Cameron's replacement and when. If it is a LEAVER then the trouble goes away.TheScreamingEagles said:On topic, The Tories are screwed if Labour ditch Corbyn for Dan Jarvis or anyone vaguely electable, basically anyone the Tories cannot characterise as a 'terrorist sympathiser'
0 -
Hard to generate any significant swing when the Labour vote share is very likely to decline.foxinsoxuk said:
It would not take much swing against the blues - to Labour, UKIP or even the LibDems - to be in hung parliament territory. I think the odds on a Labour majority are negligible at present. A change in leadership of Labour, or a major economic crisis could do it though.RodCrosby said:The difference to 1992-4 is:
Then they were led by John Smith (succeeded by St. Tone) and Labour were not too far away in seats, facing an exhausted government. They were clearly a government-in-waiting that held no fears for the voters.
Now the alternative presented is Corbyn (or some hard-left successor) propped up by the SNP...
Middle England would rather stick pins in its eyes than risk that.0 -
Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support0
-
Trump's percentage of delegates down to 46%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_republican_nomination_map.html0 -
That referendum changed everything in Scotland - imagine if Yes had really not impressed people and ended up on 35 per cent - you'd possibly still have a Labour-SNP struggle for first place there. But the current referendum won't change everything in the Conservative Party. If you pre-commit to a resignation, people are going to campaign for your role's vacancy, but this referendum has been a catalyst as a legitimate ground on which their peacock feathers can be flaunted.Alistair said:
And after the referendum everyone in Scotland went back to faithfully voting Labour.EPG said:"And after the referendum, everyone forgave and forgot and David Cameron continued on as before," is what the history books will say in two years' time, not
0 -
Yes, we could see some of the ground laid for this with Labour endorsing a pro-immigration stance in this referendum and the wc reacting accordingly.AndyJS said:
Labour are screwed because they've betrayed their former core supporters in places like Stoke-on-Trent and piling up huge majorities in the metropolitan cities won't help much.TheScreamingEagles said:On topic, The Tories are screwed if Labour ditch Corbyn for Dan Jarvis or anyone vaguely electable, basically anyone the Tories cannot characterise as a 'terrorist sympathiser'
0 -
So you expect the Tory Leavers and Remainers to kiss and make up? Seems a little improbable to me, but we shall see...TCPoliticalBetting said:
Wishful thinking of Lib Dems.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?0 -
And as L&N have proved, change - like sunspot activity - is cyclical. Two or three terms is normal, before the voters rightly suspect the other lot might do better.stodge said:Evening all
We are barely 11 months into a 60 month electoral cycle so thinking about the endgame now ignores the vast amount of water to flow under the bridge.
I do think it's not just a case of Governments losing elections - Oppositions have to win them too and both Feb 1974 and May 2010 are prime examples of the former happening but not necessarily the latter though said Oppositions found their way to Government in the end.
Sometimes you can have a perfectly good Opposition but the Government is simply better and of course there are times when the Government is the only game in town (1966, 1983, 2001 all being good examples).
I'd argue that apart from 1979 (and 1945), most changes in Government have been more about changes in management - that the electorate wanted the same things done but managed by someone else (1964, 1970, 1997) who would do them "better" which translates as kinder, fairer, more efficiently or whatever you like.
The challenges of governing in the 2020s are going to be considerable - simply doing what we did in the 2010s may not be enough - and the Party which offers a positive and credible vision for the provision of that Government is going to be the one that gets the job.
But an ace the incumbents hold is a judiciously-timed change of leader.
And if the Tories pick well, they'll be given the benefit of the doubt by the electorate in 2020...0 -
As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).0 -
It's not you; it's a poor article.kle4 said:
I'm actually struggling to identify what her principle theme is with that piece. There's a lot of stuff about things about politics that are accepted without question, around who to target and how I think, but despite her summary I'm not sure what her answer to those things are, despite the catchy title. Maybe I'm being a bit slow this evening - anyone else have an idea?AndyJS said:"Forget about Labour’s heartland, it doesn’t exist — Zoe Williams"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/10/labour-heartland-doesnt-exist-voters0 -
If they pick badly though...RodCrosby said:
And as L&N have proved, change - like sunspot activity - is cyclical. Two or three terms is normal, before the voters rightly suspect the other lot might do better.stodge said:Evening all
We are barely 11 months into a 60 month electoral cycle so thinking about the endgame now ignores the vast amount of water to flow under the bridge.
I do think it's not just a case of Governments losing elections - Oppositions have to win them too and both Feb 1974 and May 2010 are prime examples of the former happening but not necessarily the latter though said Oppositions found their way to Government in the end.
Sometimes you can have a perfectly good Opposition but the Government is simply better and of course there are times when the Government is the only game in town (1966, 1983, 2001 all being good examples).
I'd argue that apart from 1979 (and 1945), most changes in Government have been more about changes in management - that the electorate wanted the same things done but managed by someone else (1964, 1970, 1997) who would do them "better" which translates as kinder, fairer, more efficiently or whatever you like.
The challenges of governing in the 2020s are going to be considerable - simply doing what we did in the 2010s may not be enough - and the Party which offers a positive and credible vision for the provision of that Government is going to be the one that gets the job.
But an ace the incumbents hold is a judiciously-timed change of leader.
And if the Tories pick well, they'll be given the benefit of the doubt by the electorate in 2020...
And they have form!0 -
But, bar Boris, all of the candidates to replace him are weaker politicians than Cameron.RodCrosby said:
And as L&N have proved, change - like sunspot activity - is cyclical. Two or three terms is normal, before the voters rightly suspect the other lot might do better.stodge said:Evening all
We are barely 11 months into a 60 month electoral cycle so thinking about the endgame now ignores the vast amount of water to flow under the bridge.
I do think it's not just a case of Governments losing elections - Oppositions have to win them too and both Feb 1974 and May 2010 are prime examples of the former happening but not necessarily the latter though said Oppositions found their way to Government in the end.
Sometimes you can have a perfectly good Opposition but the Government is simply better and of course there are times when the Government is the only game in town (1966, 1983, 2001 all being good examples).
I'd argue that apart from 1979 (and 1945), most changes in Government have been more about changes in management - that the electorate wanted the same things done but managed by someone else (1964, 1970, 1997) who would do them "better" which translates as kinder, fairer, more efficiently or whatever you like.
The challenges of governing in the 2020s are going to be considerable - simply doing what we did in the 2010s may not be enough - and the Party which offers a positive and credible vision for the provision of that Government is going to be the one that gets the job.
But an ace the incumbents hold is a judiciously-timed change of leader.
And if the Tories pick well, they'll be given the benefit of the doubt by the electorate in 2020...0 -
A time to appreciate your nearest and dearest. It was for me a few years ago.JosiasJessop said:
Whereas with my current problems I can remember last week better than I can the last minute ... ;(MikeK said:
In a previous thread today, some PBers were talking about how drab and manky Clacton on Sea is. However I remember this sea-side town in all it's dazzling glory in 1938; I was 4 years old and loving every minute of it, from the sands to the evening shows on the pier that my parents took me to. Funny old thing is memory-I remember that holiday better than I remember last week.Tim_B said:I remember going across the Middlesbrough transporter bridge when I was a child.
0 -
The Remainers are in the minority. As long as they are not running the party post Cameron, then things will be fine. There is no alternative party for the Remainers to go to. Whereas the LEAVERS have UKIP which can act as a force from the outside.foxinsoxuk said:
So you expect the Tory Leavers and Remainers to kiss and make up? Seems a little improbable to me, but we shall see...TCPoliticalBetting said:
Wishful thinking of Lib Dems.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?
0 -
Not against CorbynDanny565 said:As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).0 -
But any negative Corbyn effect will already be priced into this year's local elections. And yet, in spite of that, it's possible that the Tories will perform worse than they did at this point in the last electoral cycle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not against CorbynDanny565 said:As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).0 -
In 1990, the Conservatives effectively managed to convince a lot of people there had been a change of Government with the ousting of Margaret Thatcher. The contrast in style between Major and Thatcher was immediate and distinct - you could have been forgiven for thinking there was a different party in Government and the voters initially preferred Major's softer, kinder style after a decade or more of Thatcher's more "conviction" style of politics.RodCrosby said:
And as L&N have proved, change - like sunspot activity - is cyclical. Two or three terms is normal, before the voters rightly suspect the other lot might do better.
But an ace the incumbents hold is a judiciously-timed change of leader.
And if the Tories pick well, they'll be given the benefit of the doubt by the electorate in 2020...
With Cameron, it won't be so easy. It'll either look as though nothing has changed or the replacement won't have the same rapport with the electorate as Cameron has enjoyed (except for Boris perhaps).
0 -
I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
0 -
Amazing what the Guardian pays for. £50m losses a year and articles such as this. The lefties that write article on PB are much much better. But somehow Zoe gets a regular slot paid by the Guardian.kle4 said:
I'm actually struggling to identify what her principle theme is with that piece. There's a lot of stuff about things about politics that are accepted without question, around who to target and how I think, but despite her summary I'm not sure what her answer to those things are, despite the catchy title. Maybe I'm being a bit slow this evening - anyone else have an idea?AndyJS said:"Forget about Labour’s heartland, it doesn’t exist — Zoe Williams"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/10/labour-heartland-doesnt-exist-voters
0 -
Shall I put you down as a maybe?tyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
0 -
That's how I do all my hole in ones.0
-
But some are better managers and others will have stronger support from members.Danny565 said:
But, bar Boris, all of the candidates to replace him are weaker politicians than Cameron.RodCrosby said:
And as L&N have proved, change - like sunspot activity - is cyclical. Two or three terms is normal, before the voters rightly suspect the other lot might do better.stodge said:Evening all
We are barely 11 months into a 60 month electoral cycle so thinking about the endgame now ignores the vast amount of water to flow under the bridge.
I do think it's not just a case of Governments losing elections - Oppositions have to win them too and both Feb 1974 and May 2010 are prime examples of the former happening but not necessarily the latter though said Oppositions found their way to Government in the end.
Sometimes you can have a perfectly good Opposition but the Government is simply better and of course there are times when the Government is the only game in town (1966, 1983, 2001 all being good examples).
I'd argue that apart from 1979 (and 1945), most changes in Government have been more about changes in management - that the electorate wanted the same things done but managed by someone else (1964, 1970, 1997) who would do them "better" which translates as kinder, fairer, more efficiently or whatever you like.
The challenges of governing in the 2020s are going to be considerable - simply doing what we did in the 2010s may not be enough - and the Party which offers a positive and credible vision for the provision of that Government is going to be the one that gets the job.
But an ace the incumbents hold is a judiciously-timed change of leader.
And if the Tories pick well, they'll be given the benefit of the doubt by the electorate in 2020...
0 -
Lib Dems.TCPoliticalBetting said:
The Remainers are in the minority. As long as they are not running the party post Cameron, then things will be fine. There is no alternative party for the Remainers to go to. Whereas the LEAVERS have UKIP which can act as a force from the outside.foxinsoxuk said:
So you expect the Tory Leavers and Remainers to kiss and make up? Seems a little improbable to me, but we shall see...TCPoliticalBetting said:
Wishful thinking of Lib Dems.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?
Labour under some other leader.
If the SNP can gain 50 seats in essentially half a year, the Conservatives can lose 25 to all comers in a parliament.0 -
TCPoliticalBetting said:
But some are better party managers, others will have stronger support from members and most will get rid of Osborne and Feldman.Danny565 said:
But, bar Boris, all of the candidates to replace him are weaker politicians than Cameron.RodCrosby said:
And as L&N have proved, change - like sunspot activity - is cyclical. Two or three terms is normal, before the voters rightly suspect the other lot might do better.stodge said:Evening all
We are barely 11 months into a 60 month electoral cycle so thinking about the endgame now ignores the vast amount of water to flow under the bridge.
I do think it's not just a case of Governments losing elections - Oppositions have to win them too and both Feb 1974 and May 2010 are prime examples of the former happening but not necessarily the latter though said Oppositions found their way to Government in the end.
Sometimes you can have a perfectly good Opposition but the Government is simply better and of course there are times when the Government is the only game in town (1966, 1983, 2001 all being good examples).
I'd argue that apart from 1979 (and 1945), most changes in Government have been more about changes in management - that the electorate wanted the same things done but managed by someone else (1964, 1970, 1997) who would do them "better" which translates as kinder, fairer, more efficiently or whatever you like.
The challenges of governing in the 2020s are going to be considerable - simply doing what we did in the 2010s may not be enough - and the Party which offers a positive and credible vision for the provision of that Government is going to be the one that gets the job.
But an ace the incumbents hold is a judiciously-timed change of leader.
And if the Tories pick well, they'll be given the benefit of the doubt by the electorate in 2020...0 -
that the Tories are imploding is a given but unless you can find a convincing reason why or how Corbyn will be replaced then the Tories will remain in power whichever nutter takes over.
Corbyn is repulsive and I don't even care about his links to terrorism. Once in a lifetime you come across someone who you just know will be repellent to voters and I speak as someone who liked Michael Foot0 -
I drafted a thread last year that began withtyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
'Jeremy Corbyn has only two flaws, everything he says and everything he does, but apart from that he could be a very effective leader for Labour'
0 -
Very funny TSE. How were the Muse?TheScreamingEagles said:
I drafted a thread last year that began withtyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
'Jeremy Corbyn has only two flaws, everything he says and everything he does, but apart from that he could be a very effective leader for Labour'0 -
Yeah, and of course Major was a Titan compared to Thatcher...Danny565 said:
But, bar Boris, all of the candidates to replace him are weaker politicians than Cameron.RodCrosby said:
And as L&N have proved, change - like sunspot activity - is cyclical. Two or three terms is normal, before the voters rightly suspect the other lot might do better.stodge said:Evening all
We are barely 11 months into a 60 month electoral cycle so thinking about the endgame now ignores the vast amount of water to flow under the bridge.
I do think it's not just a case of Governments losing elections - Oppositions have to win them too and both Feb 1974 and May 2010 are prime examples of the former happening but not necessarily the latter though said Oppositions found their way to Government in the end.
Sometimes you can have a perfectly good Opposition but the Government is simply better and of course there are times when the Government is the only game in town (1966, 1983, 2001 all being good examples).
I'd argue that apart from 1979 (and 1945), most changes in Government have been more about changes in management - that the electorate wanted the same things done but managed by someone else (1964, 1970, 1997) who would do them "better" which translates as kinder, fairer, more efficiently or whatever you like.
The challenges of governing in the 2020s are going to be considerable - simply doing what we did in the 2010s may not be enough - and the Party which offers a positive and credible vision for the provision of that Government is going to be the one that gets the job.
But an ace the incumbents hold is a judiciously-timed change of leader.
And if the Tories pick well, they'll be given the benefit of the doubt by the electorate in 2020...
The Tories are experts in sensing the electorate's mood, and will most likely get it right.0 -
They were great. An absolute visual and audio treat.tyson said:Very funny TSE. How were the Muse?
TheScreamingEagles said:
I drafted a thread last year that began withtyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
'Jeremy Corbyn has only two flaws, everything he says and everything he does, but apart from that he could be a very effective leader for Labour'0 -
You may well be right. The referendum is distracting internal resources for the Conservatives more than is happening inside Labour.Danny565 said:
But any negative Corbyn effect will already be priced into this year's local elections. And yet, in spite of that, it's possible that the Tories will perform worse than they did at this point in the last electoral cycle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not against CorbynDanny565 said:As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).
0 -
I will have to disagree with you on at least one thing - I happen to think Corbyn has quite an effective, authoritative voice.tyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
0 -
He is not priced in in a general electionDanny565 said:
But any negative Corbyn effect will already be priced into this year's local elections. And yet, in spite of that, it's possible that the Tories will perform worse than they did at this point in the last electoral cycle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not against CorbynDanny565 said:As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).0 -
The new leader doesn't need to be stronger than Cameron, just stronger than Corbyn.Danny565 said:
But, bar Boris, all of the candidates to replace him are weaker politicians than Cameron.RodCrosby said:
And as L&N have proved, change - like sunspot activity - is cyclical. Two or three terms is normal, before the voters rightly suspect the other lot might do better.stodge said:Evening all
We are barely 11 months into a 60 month electoral cycle so thinking about the endgame now ignores the vast amount of water to flow under the bridge.
I do think it's not just a case of Governments losing elections - Oppositions have to win them too and both Feb 1974 and May 2010 are prime examples of the former happening but not necessarily the latter though said Oppositions found their way to Government in the end.
Sometimes you can have a perfectly good Opposition but the Government is simply better and of course there are times when the Government is the only game in town (1966, 1983, 2001 all being good examples).
I'd argue that apart from 1979 (and 1945), most changes in Government have been more about changes in management - that the electorate wanted the same things done but managed by someone else (1964, 1970, 1997) who would do them "better" which translates as kinder, fairer, more efficiently or whatever you like.
The challenges of governing in the 2020s are going to be considerable - simply doing what we did in the 2010s may not be enough - and the Party which offers a positive and credible vision for the provision of that Government is going to be the one that gets the job.
But an ace the incumbents hold is a judiciously-timed change of leader.
And if the Tories pick well, they'll be given the benefit of the doubt by the electorate in 2020...0 -
top end REMAINERs only want to be in political office. No chance with the Lib Dems and Labour have been taken over by socialists.EPG said:
Lib Dems.TCPoliticalBetting said:
The Remainers are in the minority. As long as they are not running the party post Cameron, then things will be fine. There is no alternative party for the Remainers to go to. Whereas the LEAVERS have UKIP which can act as a force from the outside.foxinsoxuk said:
So you expect the Tory Leavers and Remainers to kiss and make up? Seems a little improbable to me, but we shall see...TCPoliticalBetting said:
Wishful thinking of Lib Dems.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?
Labour under some other leader.
If the SNP can gain 50 seats in essentially half a year, the Conservatives can lose 25 to all comers in a parliament.
0 -
Ed Miliband's crapness was priced in and look how that turned out.Big_G_NorthWales said:
He is not priced in in a general electionDanny565 said:
But any negative Corbyn effect will already be priced into this year's local elections. And yet, in spite of that, it's possible that the Tories will perform worse than they did at this point in the last electoral cycle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not against CorbynDanny565 said:As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).0 -
@chrisshipitv: Politicians now throwing their tax returns at us 'like some sort of dull confetti' @carldinnen says on @itvnews tonight after PM's bad week
Well, not all of them...
@sammacrory: "No. Big no" - @Nigel_Farage on whether he'd publish his tax returns @BBCWestminHour0 -
There is an interesting irony in how much room there is in Westminster politics for a credible third party and how big an opening exists now, yet at the same time, how far the Liberals are from being able to take advantage of this.0
-
@gabyhinsliff: There is literally no better way to make everyone want to see your tax return, than to insist you're not publishing your tax return0
-
But if Labour come out ahead of the Tories in the estimated vote shares in May, then Corbyn will have done better than Miliband in his first local elections.TheScreamingEagles said:
Ed Miliband's crapness was priced in and look how that turned out.Big_G_NorthWales said:
He is not priced in in a general electionDanny565 said:
But any negative Corbyn effect will already be priced into this year's local elections. And yet, in spite of that, it's possible that the Tories will perform worse than they did at this point in the last electoral cycle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not against CorbynDanny565 said:As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).0 -
The SNP are credible, respected and popular.EPG said:
Lib Dems.TCPoliticalBetting said:
The Remainers are in the minority. As long as they are not running the party post Cameron, then things will be fine. There is no alternative party for the Remainers to go to. Whereas the LEAVERS have UKIP which can act as a force from the outside.foxinsoxuk said:
So you expect the Tory Leavers and Remainers to kiss and make up? Seems a little improbable to me, but we shall see...TCPoliticalBetting said:
Wishful thinking of Lib Dems.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?
Labour under some other leader.
If the SNP can gain 50 seats in essentially half a year, the Conservatives can lose 25 to all comers in a parliament.
UKIP are not. The Greens are not. The Liberals are not.0 -
2011 was a weird one because of the massive Lib Dem unwindDanny565 said:
But if Labour come out ahead of the Tories in the estimated vote shares in May, then Corbyn will have done better than Miliband in his first local elections.TheScreamingEagles said:
Ed Miliband's crapness was priced in and look how that turned out.Big_G_NorthWales said:
He is not priced in in a general electionDanny565 said:
But any negative Corbyn effect will already be priced into this year's local elections. And yet, in spite of that, it's possible that the Tories will perform worse than they did at this point in the last electoral cycle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not against CorbynDanny565 said:As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).0 -
I get the feeling that many of the journos running around demanding tax returns of all.and sundry are suffering from nosey Parker syndrome....like the people who spend far top many hours searching net to find out how much some bodies house was bought / sold for.0
-
How did we get from there to here? I can't remember a time when politics for the centre centre left has looked so bleak.tyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
Can you even imagine the headbangers who could be leading the government after the referendum?0 -
Corbyn is great at preaching to the converted, but seems oblivious of the politically-agnostic.kle4 said:
I will have to disagree with you on at least one thing - I happen to think Corbyn has quite an effective, authoritative voice.tyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
He has a brittle personality too, on display again this week. He doesn't like being doorstepped. "These people are bothering me." / "Don't point that phone at me."
WTF? A leader has to accept this goes with the job, and not be deeply uncool about it in front of the cameras...0 -
It is remarkable. I suppose they still might, but it is hard to see how.DairA said:There is an interesting irony in how much room there is in Westminster politics for a credible third party and how big an opening exists now, yet at the same time, how far the Liberals are from being able to take advantage of this.
0 -
I can't imagine how he will cope during a month long GE campaign...RodCrosby said:
Corbyn is great at preaching to the converted, but seems oblivious of the politically-agnostic.kle4 said:
I will have to disagree with you on at least one thing - I happen to think Corbyn has quite an effective, authoritative voice.tyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
He has a brittle personality too, on display again this week. He doesn't like being doorstepped. "These people are bothering me." / "Don't point that phone at me."
WTF? A leader has to accept this goes with the job, and not be deeply uncool about it in front of the cameras...0 -
Roger- we are not in a minority you know. I've got a very dear friend, a long term Labour stalwart who is visiting me this week. He had an argument with a mouthy, leading Corbynite who threatened to glass him.
My wife has given up her membership to the Labour party because she despises Corbyn. Most of my Labour buddies are desperate with the situation.
And, the ones who I know that support Corbyn, seem to hate any electable name in the Labour party- David Miliband, Chuka, Dan Jarvis more than the far right. There is actually no point discussing anything with them.Roger said:that the Tories are imploding is a given but unless you can find a convincing reason why or how Corbyn will be replaced then the Tories will remain in power whichever nutter takes over.
Corbyn is repulsive and I don't even care about his links to terrorism. Once in a lifetime you come across someone who you just know will be repellent to voters and I speak as someone who liked Michael Foot0 -
Maybe this masters isn't the over yet...0
-
Are =/= will beDairA said:
The SNP are credible, respected and popular.EPG said:
Lib Dems.TCPoliticalBetting said:
The Remainers are in the minority. As long as they are not running the party post Cameron, then things will be fine. There is no alternative party for the Remainers to go to. Whereas the LEAVERS have UKIP which can act as a force from the outside.foxinsoxuk said:
So you expect the Tory Leavers and Remainers to kiss and make up? Seems a little improbable to me, but we shall see...TCPoliticalBetting said:
Wishful thinking of Lib Dems.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?
Labour under some other leader.
If the SNP can gain 50 seats in essentially half a year, the Conservatives can lose 25 to all comers in a parliament.
UKIP are not. The Greens are not. The Liberals are not.
Fanboys care about the former. Punters care about the latter.0 -
I may be barking up the wrong tree here, but I'm guessing mcdonnell etc releasing their tax returns a while back means they got an early heads-up on the panama papers and took preemptive action.
Good politics.0 -
But it's not just 2011: historically, if a government loses local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they go on to lose the next GE.TheScreamingEagles said:
2011 was a weird one because of the massive Lib Dem unwindDanny565 said:
But if Labour come out ahead of the Tories in the estimated vote shares in May, then Corbyn will have done better than Miliband in his first local elections.TheScreamingEagles said:
Ed Miliband's crapness was priced in and look how that turned out.Big_G_NorthWales said:
He is not priced in in a general electionDanny565 said:
But any negative Corbyn effect will already be priced into this year's local elections. And yet, in spite of that, it's possible that the Tories will perform worse than they did at this point in the last electoral cycle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Not against CorbynDanny565 said:As I said in the thread last night, there hasn't been anywhere near enough attention paid to how historically poorly the Tories may perform in terms of the National Estimated Vote in the upcoming local elections. A sitting government always has something of a honeymoon effect lingering when it's just a year on from a General Election win.
Rallings & Thrasher estimated the other day that the Tories would only lead Labour by 1% in the vote in the locals; it doesn't seem inconceivable now with the recent turmoil that Labour could sneak a small lead. If that happens, it will spell trouble for the Tories -- if a party loses in the local elections in the first year of the electoral cycle, they usually go on to lose the next General Election (the Tories won the 2011 locals by 1%).
In 1984, 1988, 1998 and 2011, the sitting government beat the Opposition in the locals, and duly went on to win the next General Election. The examples since 1983 of a government not winning the locals in the first year are 1993, 2002 and 2006: in two of those examples, the government went onto lose badly at the next GE. Labour narrowly lost the 2002 locals by 1%, and did go onto win the GE in 2005, although only by 3% (would that be enough for the Tories to get a majority in 2020??).0 -
Get in there! COME ON DANNY!0
-
After the other elections are out of the way, that should be the get out the vote message by the non Tory remainers.Roger said:
How did we get from there to here? I can't remember a time when politics for the centre centre left has looked so bleak.tyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
Can you even imagine the headbangers who could be leading the government after the referendum?
Farages braying face and the message "imagine him in charge"0 -
Great stuff- the Muse at the Arena in Manchester- seriously jealous.TheScreamingEagles said:
They were great. An absolute visual and audio treat.tyson said:Very funny TSE. How were the Muse?
TheScreamingEagles said:
I drafted a thread last year that began withtyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
'Jeremy Corbyn has only two flaws, everything he says and everything he does, but apart from that he could be a very effective leader for Labour'0 -
Spieth has lost his smooth. Danny Willet pounces.0
-
Speith is doing a great impression of that greg Norman blow up of 20 years ago!!!0
-
If any of the latter can change their position, then there has to be a credible pathway for them to do so. Perhaps you can help us with what that pathway might be, because I really can't imagine any way they could do so, certainly not before 2020.EPG said:
Are =/= will beDairA said:
The SNP are credible, respected and popular.EPG said:
Lib Dems.TCPoliticalBetting said:
The Remainers are in the minority. As long as they are not running the party post Cameron, then things will be fine. There is no alternative party for the Remainers to go to. Whereas the LEAVERS have UKIP which can act as a force from the outside.foxinsoxuk said:
So you expect the Tory Leavers and Remainers to kiss and make up? Seems a little improbable to me, but we shall see...TCPoliticalBetting said:
Wishful thinking of Lib Dems.foxinsoxuk said:While I agree with Alastair, I cannot see me being tempted by the odds this far out. There are simply too many variables.
Tory civil war worsening is nailed on, but other than that, who knows?
Labour under some other leader.
If the SNP can gain 50 seats in essentially half a year, the Conservatives can lose 25 to all comers in a parliament.
UKIP are not. The Greens are not. The Liberals are not.
Fanboys care about the former. Punters care about the latter.0 -
Damn- I cashed out on my bet for Dustin Johnson at a 100 quid profit five minutes ago. It is worth five times that now.....0
-
On the other hand, Alastair (né antifrank) was confidently saying in early 2015 that NOM would be value at even shorter odds than were on offer at the time...
I think the big flaw in his analysis is the statement that 'Conservative divisions aren’t going away'. It really doesn't look like that within the party, at least as far as I can see. We shouldn't give too much salience to current issues. Everything will look different on June 24th.0 -
Indeed. If things go the wrong way it could be the newly politically unaware Osbo....Roger said:
How did we get from there to here? I can't remember a time when politics for the centre centre left has looked so bleak.tyson said:I think Corbyn has much more deep rooted personal problems than these. He is austere, humourless, not particularly bright, has a grating voice, boring as hell and is becoming distinctly unlikeable. His USP- straight talking, and being unspun is as tired and drab as his dress sense.
Corbyn is a throwback to the grey, petty politics of the 70's. If there was a leadership election tomorrow, apart from the usual head banging cheerleaders, I doubt he would make anything like the inroads he did last year.
Apart from that he is a winner.Roger said:Corbyn has pushed his luck too far. He's now looking vindictive and mean spirited which isn't an attractive look for anyone least of all someone trying to win the public's affection and support
Can you even imagine the headbangers who could be leading the government after the referendum?0 -
It's worse than that now!FrancisUrquhart said:Speith is doing a great impression of that greg Norman blow up of 20 years ago!!!
0
