"Note that in the betting a CON majority is generally defined as being in excess of 325 seats."
I heard a rumour from my fellow Yoons on twitter that Nippy is thinking of doing a SF and removing their MPs from Parliament.
Popcorn time all round if you as me.
I can't imagine she would do that, she will never get an indyref2 with a Tory government, only a Starmer minority government reliant on her support will give one
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
Of course Cameron failed to win a majority in 2010 too, however he did manage to deprive Labour of their majority and get enough seats to form a government with the LDs.
If Starmer does become PM it is much more likely that he would do so via the Cameron 2010 route than the Blair 1997 route, just most likely with the SNP added onto the LDs too
Indeed, that is my point.
Except that Cameron was almost always in the lead in the polls. He was consistently taken seriously as next PM, with only the very brief Brown bounce when his party wasn't in the lead.
You're rewriting history to say he was underestimated. He wasn't, he was consistently topping the polls. Starmer isn't. Not remotely the same thing.
No, Philip, I am giving an opinion on how I recall he was treated by the media and your equivalents on the other side of the political spectrum. He was a lightweight, a chameleon, lacks substance etc etc.
In case you hadn't noticed, times are a little different now from when Cameron was LoTO. The Tory Party had also already been reformed and the nutters (who are now largely in charge of the Tory Party) were largely silent. You are so partisan you desperately want Starmer to be rubbish. He isn't, but keep believing it if it makes you happy!
Once again as always you have me backwards.
I quit the Tory Party already. So especially now but even when in it, I'd quite like an Opposition that could hold the Government to account.
It isn't healthy for the nation to have only one credible party of Government and that's the situation we are in now sadly and Starmer has not changed that.
He hasn't even attempted to set out an alternative vision for the country. Blair did, Cameron did, Boris did.
Starmer just seems to want to win by default. Simply not being Corbyn and not being Boris may be enough for those who are set in their own views already and regard the PM as a "clown". But it isn't enough to become Prime Minister. He needs to do the hard work and that isn't happening.
You've quit again? The mobility boggles. You're like Big G and Churchill!
What if Frostie invokes Article 16 and tears up the Brexit deal? That'll get you back, I suppose. Until the next time ...
I mentioned a few days ago that I was up for a small bet on an increased majority for the Tories at anything better than 5/1. This rather reinforces that view. Does anyone know where there is a market?
Conservatives to increase their majority from 2019 (80 seats) at 2/1 with Ladbrokes
If Con MAJ is EVS, and increased majority is 2/1, that implies Con Maj less than 80 is about 5/1! Must be the worst bet in the world that 2/1
It's absolutely shocking. Beyond mug. Any PBer takes that, they don't deserve to be on here, far as I'm concerned. They'd have to be banned.
PBers probably know that bookies are not registered charities running generous systems to grant large benefits to indigent punters. (Except the odds they offered on LDs for C&A.)
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
"Note that in the betting a CON majority is generally defined as being in excess of 325 seats."
I heard a rumour from my fellow Yoons on twitter that Nippy is thinking of doing a SF and removing their MPs from Parliament.
Popcorn time all round if you as me.
I can't imagine she would do that, she will never get an indyref2 with a Tory government, only a Starmer minority government reliant on her support will give one
It would be a constitutional crisis with a very unpredictable outcome
"Note that in the betting a CON majority is generally defined as being in excess of 325 seats."
I heard a rumour from my fellow Yoons on twitter that Nippy is thinking of doing a SF and removing their MPs from Parliament.
Popcorn time all round if you as me.
I can't imagine she would do that, she will never get an indyref2 with a Tory government, only a Starmer minority government reliant on her support will give one
Your Scotland analysis is sound again if you ask me. Stranger thing have happened though...
Note the first part of the paper laments the decline of practical and otherwise interesting topics in favour of testing because grades are all that matter, rather than stimulating scientists of the future.
This is part of the reason for grade inflation. Not dumbing down but the ruthless adoption of better learning strategies.
But the education system might be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
Of course Cameron failed to win a majority in 2010 too, however he did manage to deprive Labour of their majority and get enough seats to form a government with the LDs.
If Starmer does become PM it is much more likely that he would do so via the Cameron 2010 route than the Blair 1997 route, just most likely with the SNP added onto the LDs too
Indeed, that is my point.
Except that Cameron was almost always in the lead in the polls. He was consistently taken seriously as next PM, with only the very brief Brown bounce when his party wasn't in the lead.
You're rewriting history to say he was underestimated. He wasn't, he was consistently topping the polls. Starmer isn't. Not remotely the same thing.
No, Philip, I am giving an opinion on how I recall he was treated by the media and your equivalents on the other side of the political spectrum. He was a lightweight, a chameleon, lacks substance etc etc.
In case you hadn't noticed, times are a little different now from when Cameron was LoTO. The Tory Party had also already been reformed and the nutters (who are now largely in charge of the Tory Party) were largely silent. You are so partisan you desperately want Starmer to be rubbish. He isn't, but keep believing it if it makes you happy!
Once again as always you have me backwards.
I quit the Tory Party already. So especially now but even when in it, I'd quite like an Opposition that could hold the Government to account.
It isn't healthy for the nation to have only one credible party of Government and that's the situation we are in now sadly and Starmer has not changed that.
He hasn't even attempted to set out an alternative vision for the country. Blair did, Cameron did, Boris did.
Starmer just seems to want to win by default. Simply not being Corbyn and not being Boris may be enough for those who are set in their own views already and regard the PM as a "clown". But it isn't enough to become Prime Minister. He needs to do the hard work and that isn't happening.
You've quit again? The mobility boggles. You're like Big G and Churchill!
What if Frostie invokes Article 16 and tears up the Brexit deal? That'll get you back, I suppose. Until the next time ...
I am very flattered to be mentioned alongside Churchill !!!!!
"Note that in the betting a CON majority is generally defined as being in excess of 325 seats."
I heard a rumour from my fellow Yoons on twitter that Nippy is thinking of doing a SF and removing their MPs from Parliament.
Popcorn time all round if you as me.
I can't imagine she would do that, she will never get an indyref2 with a Tory government, only a Starmer minority government reliant on her support will give one
She won't do it, but not because she won't get Ref2. Ref2 is a real risk, as she might (possibly) win, which would be a major problem for her, or lose, which would be a major problem for her. At the moment the Scots and especially politicians both have and eat their cake. Watch carefully as she finesses to keep it that way.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
Of course Cameron failed to win a majority in 2010 too, however he did manage to deprive Labour of their majority and get enough seats to form a government with the LDs.
If Starmer does become PM it is much more likely that he would do so via the Cameron 2010 route than the Blair 1997 route, just most likely with the SNP added onto the LDs too
Indeed, that is my point.
Except that Cameron was almost always in the lead in the polls. He was consistently taken seriously as next PM, with only the very brief Brown bounce when his party wasn't in the lead.
You're rewriting history to say he was underestimated. He wasn't, he was consistently topping the polls. Starmer isn't. Not remotely the same thing.
No, Philip, I am giving an opinion on how I recall he was treated by the media and your equivalents on the other side of the political spectrum. He was a lightweight, a chameleon, lacks substance etc etc.
In case you hadn't noticed, times are a little different now from when Cameron was LoTO. The Tory Party had also already been reformed and the nutters (who are now largely in charge of the Tory Party) were largely silent. You are so partisan you desperately want Starmer to be rubbish. He isn't, but keep believing it if it makes you happy!
Once again as always you have me backwards.
I quit the Tory Party already. So especially now but even when in it, I'd quite like an Opposition that could hold the Government to account.
It isn't healthy for the nation to have only one credible party of Government and that's the situation we are in now sadly and Starmer has not changed that.
He hasn't even attempted to set out an alternative vision for the country. Blair did, Cameron did, Boris did.
Starmer just seems to want to win by default. Simply not being Corbyn and not being Boris may be enough for those who are set in their own views already and regard the PM as a "clown". But it isn't enough to become Prime Minister. He needs to do the hard work and that isn't happening.
You've quit again? The mobility boggles. You're like Big G and Churchill!
What if Frostie invokes Article 16 and tears up the Brexit deal? That'll get you back, I suppose. Until the next time ...
I am very flattered to be mentioned alongside Churchill !!!!!
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
Of course Cameron failed to win a majority in 2010 too, however he did manage to deprive Labour of their majority and get enough seats to form a government with the LDs.
If Starmer does become PM it is much more likely that he would do so via the Cameron 2010 route than the Blair 1997 route, just most likely with the SNP added onto the LDs too
Indeed, that is my point.
Except that Cameron was almost always in the lead in the polls. He was consistently taken seriously as next PM, with only the very brief Brown bounce when his party wasn't in the lead.
You're rewriting history to say he was underestimated. He wasn't, he was consistently topping the polls. Starmer isn't. Not remotely the same thing.
No, Philip, I am giving an opinion on how I recall he was treated by the media and your equivalents on the other side of the political spectrum. He was a lightweight, a chameleon, lacks substance etc etc.
In case you hadn't noticed, times are a little different now from when Cameron was LoTO. The Tory Party had also already been reformed and the nutters (who are now largely in charge of the Tory Party) were largely silent. You are so partisan you desperately want Starmer to be rubbish. He isn't, but keep believing it if it makes you happy!
Once again as always you have me backwards.
I quit the Tory Party already. So especially now but even when in it, I'd quite like an Opposition that could hold the Government to account.
It isn't healthy for the nation to have only one credible party of Government and that's the situation we are in now sadly and Starmer has not changed that.
He hasn't even attempted to set out an alternative vision for the country. Blair did, Cameron did, Boris did.
Starmer just seems to want to win by default. Simply not being Corbyn and not being Boris may be enough for those who are set in their own views already and regard the PM as a "clown". But it isn't enough to become Prime Minister. He needs to do the hard work and that isn't happening.
You've quit again? The mobility boggles. You're like Big G and Churchill!
What if Frostie invokes Article 16 and tears up the Brexit deal? That'll get you back, I suppose. Until the next time ...
What do you mean? I never rejoined.
I left over the economic handling so Europe has nothing to do with it.
Next set piece I will reconsider is the Budget, but unless there's a surprisingly good Budget I don't think I'll reconsider.
I mentioned a few days ago that I was up for a small bet on an increased majority for the Tories at anything better than 5/1. This rather reinforces that view. Does anyone know where there is a market?
Conservatives to increase their majority from 2019 (80 seats) at 2/1 with Ladbrokes
If Con MAJ is EVS, and increased majority is 2/1, that implies Con Maj less than 80 is about 5/1! Must be the worst bet in the world that 2/1
It's absolutely shocking. Beyond mug. Any PBer takes that, they don't deserve to be on here, far as I'm concerned. They'd have to be banned.
PBers probably know that bookies are not registered charities running generous systems to grant large benefits to indigent punters. (Except the odds they offered on LDs for C&A.)
Actually, they might be. In today's instalment (part 2) of the Shadsy interview, Matthew Shaddick explains that so far as political betting is concerned, neither Ladbrokes (at first) or Smarkets is particularly interested in making a profit. Rather it is seen as PR (free advertising when odds are quoted in the papers) or as, well, watch the (short) video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcjGZsJLuOE
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
Really? That’s bonkers on stilts. London is a completely different world. Very dovish indeed.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I disagree, for two reasons. Starmer has no charisma or political judgement. I was never a huge fan of Cameron, but he at least had a modicum of both.
And Starmer is hugely dishonest and opportunistic. The editor of Socialist Challenge in his youth, then sitting in Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet, then running as a Corbynista for the Labour leadership, now pretending to be a centrist. So while I don't think Johnson has much if any credibility after all his opportunistic U-turns, I don't think Starmer has much if any more, and arguably considerably less.
People have political journeys, and most people become more conservative as they age: Tony Blair was a Trotskyist at university, for example.
"Note that in the betting a CON majority is generally defined as being in excess of 325 seats."
I heard a rumour from my fellow Yoons on twitter that Nippy is thinking of doing a SF and removing their MPs from Parliament.
Popcorn time all round if you as me.
Unless you live in Scotland of course where you have to cope with the Nightmare that Nippy and Eck have caused.
I wonder why "we" keep voting for this "nightmare"?
I think the in the Holyrood election this year people tended to just vote for the incumbent because they didn't want too much change.
However voting SNP is pretty stupid if you want no change.
I guess you could say - Half of Scots are Morons
That's a useful and insightful analysis, and it will help me in deciding who to vote for next year. Thank you.
You don't live in Scotland !?
Banff & Buchan constituency
Ah, ok, my apologies. You must know all sorts of the local characters there.
We don't get many visits from politicians round here, it's pretty rural where I am. Only political activity I've seen recently is an Alba poster gone up in a window, and a Conservative leaflet through the door. I don't think half the people around here are morons, perhaps that's balanced out by Fife?
I mentioned a few days ago that I was up for a small bet on an increased majority for the Tories at anything better than 5/1. This rather reinforces that view. Does anyone know where there is a market?
Conservatives to increase their majority from 2019 (80 seats) at 2/1 with Ladbrokes
If Con MAJ is EVS, and increased majority is 2/1, that implies Con Maj less than 80 is about 5/1! Must be the worst bet in the world that 2/1
It's absolutely shocking. Beyond mug. Any PBer takes that, they don't deserve to be on here, far as I'm concerned. They'd have to be banned.
PBers probably know that bookies are not registered charities running generous systems to grant large benefits to indigent punters. (Except the odds they offered on LDs for C&A.)
Actually, they might be. In today's instalment (part 2) of the Shadsy interview, Matthew Shaddick explains that so far as political betting is concerned, neither Ladbrokes (at first) or Smarkets is particularly interested in making a profit. Rather it is seen as PR (free advertising when odds are quoted in the papers) or as, well, watch the (short) video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcjGZsJLuOE
I did kind of suspect that of political betting via bookies RE:profit
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
You've made this fallacious comparison more than a few times.
Cameron wasn't underestimated. He led in the polls consistently for all but 3 months of his leadership from when he became Leader of the Opposition, to when he became Prime Minister. Only for a small 3 month window was he not in the lead. Chart
Starmer has never achieved crossover to lead in the polls for the rolling average. Not once. Chart
Starmer isn't remotely in the same league as Cameron.
Yes, as soon as the public saw Cameron vs Brown instead of Cameron vs Blair, he never looked back. I think Brown led Cameron at first, during recess, but once Parliament started again, if I have got my dates right, Cameron took the lead forever
Actually Cameron consistently led versus Blair too. He took the lead immediately as soon as he became LOTO.
Cameron led in the polls the entire time he was Leader of the Opposition, apart from a very brief interregnum while Brown became PM.
A year and a half after Cameron was elected leader, ie the equivalent stage Starmer is at now, in June 2007 Mori had Labour ahead 39% to 36% for the Tories and Yougov had the Tories ahead on 37% to 35% for Labour.
Nice attempt to cherrypick data but you've got your dates wrong. Cameron became LOTO at the start of December 2005 so a year and a half after was May 2007 not June 2007. In May 2007 Cameron's Conservatives were beating Blair's Labour in every single poll.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
No, 6 months added onto December 2005 is June 2007.
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
Of course Cameron failed to win a majority in 2010 too, however he did manage to deprive Labour of their majority and get enough seats to form a government with the LDs.
If Starmer does become PM it is much more likely that he would do so via the Cameron 2010 route than the Blair 1997 route, just most likely with the SNP added onto the LDs too
Indeed, that is my point.
Except that Cameron was almost always in the lead in the polls. He was consistently taken seriously as next PM, with only the very brief Brown bounce when his party wasn't in the lead.
You're rewriting history to say he was underestimated. He wasn't, he was consistently topping the polls. Starmer isn't. Not remotely the same thing.
No, Philip, I am giving an opinion on how I recall he was treated by the media and your equivalents on the other side of the political spectrum. He was a lightweight, a chameleon, lacks substance etc etc.
In case you hadn't noticed, times are a little different now from when Cameron was LoTO. The Tory Party had also already been reformed and the nutters (who are now largely in charge of the Tory Party) were largely silent. You are so partisan you desperately want Starmer to be rubbish. He isn't, but keep believing it if it makes you happy!
Once again as always you have me backwards.
I quit the Tory Party already. So especially now but even when in it, I'd quite like an Opposition that could hold the Government to account.
It isn't healthy for the nation to have only one credible party of Government and that's the situation we are in now sadly and Starmer has not changed that.
He hasn't even attempted to set out an alternative vision for the country. Blair did, Cameron did, Boris did.
Starmer just seems to want to win by default. Simply not being Corbyn and not being Boris may be enough for those who are set in their own views already and regard the PM as a "clown". But it isn't enough to become Prime Minister. He needs to do the hard work and that isn't happening.
You've quit again? The mobility boggles. You're like Big G and Churchill!
What if Frostie invokes Article 16 and tears up the Brexit deal? That'll get you back, I suppose. Until the next time ...
What do you mean? I never rejoined.
I left over the economic handling so Europe has nothing to do with it.
Next set piece I will reconsider is the Budget, but unless there's a surprisingly good Budget I don't think I'll reconsider.
You know you said you regretted using your own name? How about you ask Mike if you could change your name to Hokey Cokey?
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I disagree, for two reasons. Starmer has no charisma or political judgement. I was never a huge fan of Cameron, but he at least had a modicum of both.
And Starmer is hugely dishonest and opportunistic. The editor of Socialist Challenge in his youth, then sitting in Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet, then running as a Corbynista for the Labour leadership, now pretending to be a centrist. So while I don't think Johnson has much if any credibility after all his opportunistic U-turns, I don't think Starmer has much if any more, and arguably considerably less.
People have political journeys, and most people become more conservative as they age: Tony Blair was a Trotskyist at university, for example.
I've heard it said before that leading a country really ages people, looking at pictures of leaders at the start and end of the Premiership can be quite amusing.
Never heard that being elected Opposition Leader ages you so much.
Starmer was quite content to be in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet only recently, he refused to back or support any of the people harassed for antisemitism instead tying his name to Corbyn and supporting him to the hilt. If voters had voted differently, he was content to serve in Corbyn's Cabinet.
"Note that in the betting a CON majority is generally defined as being in excess of 325 seats."
I heard a rumour from my fellow Yoons on twitter that Nippy is thinking of doing a SF and removing their MPs from Parliament.
Popcorn time all round if you as me.
Unless you live in Scotland of course where you have to cope with the Nightmare that Nippy and Eck have caused.
I wonder why "we" keep voting for this "nightmare"?
I think the in the Holyrood election this year people tended to just vote for the incumbent because they didn't want too much change.
However voting SNP is pretty stupid if you want no change.
I guess you could say - Half of Scots are Morons
That's a useful and insightful analysis, and it will help me in deciding who to vote for next year. Thank you.
You don't live in Scotland !?
Banff & Buchan constituency
Ah, ok, my apologies. You must know all sorts of the local characters there.
We don't get many visits from politicians round here, it's pretty rural where I am. Only political activity I've seen recently is an Alba poster gone up in a window, and a Conservative leaflet through the door. I don't think half the people around here are morons, perhaps that's balanced out by Fife?
The sophistication of the new energy paradigm LOL - until they get an automated smart grid far enough down the road.
Tonight people on Octopus Agile Tariff will be paid 2.21p per unit to use electricity. So I forecast it will be windy.
Plunge pricing alert for Octopus Agile electricity. First time in weeks that the price has dipped below the 35p/unit cap ** by more than a couple of pence.
Tomorrow morning they’ll pay 2.21/unit (just for 30 mins) but between midnight and 06:00 the average unit price is 5.602p.
Sunamp *, washing machine and dishwasher will be in the starting blocks at midnight.
* A Sunamp is a phase change heat battery, that stores energy far more effectively than an insulated hot water tank. But is still rather expensive. ** The 35p per unit relates to the price around the peak period in the evening. You need to be able to time shift loads to avoid it.
"Note that in the betting a CON majority is generally defined as being in excess of 325 seats."
I heard a rumour from my fellow Yoons on twitter that Nippy is thinking of doing a SF and removing their MPs from Parliament.
Popcorn time all round if you as me.
Unless you live in Scotland of course where you have to cope with the Nightmare that Nippy and Eck have caused.
I wonder why "we" keep voting for this "nightmare"?
I think the in the Holyrood election this year people tended to just vote for the incumbent because they didn't want too much change.
However voting SNP is pretty stupid if you want no change.
I guess you could say - Half of Scots are Morons
That's a useful and insightful analysis, and it will help me in deciding who to vote for next year. Thank you.
You don't live in Scotland !?
Banff & Buchan constituency
Ah, ok, my apologies. You must know all sorts of the local characters there.
We don't get many visits from politicians round here, it's pretty rural where I am. Only political activity I've seen recently is an Alba poster gone up in a window, and a Conservative leaflet through the door. I don't think half the people around here are morons, perhaps that's balanced out by Fife?
Apologies, by the way, if anyone here is from The Kingdom. It's just that St Andrews is an easy target for teasing.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I disagree, for two reasons. Starmer has no charisma or political judgement. I was never a huge fan of Cameron, but he at least had a modicum of both.
And Starmer is hugely dishonest and opportunistic. The editor of Socialist Challenge in his youth, then sitting in Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet, then running as a Corbynista for the Labour leadership, now pretending to be a centrist. So while I don't think Johnson has much if any credibility after all his opportunistic U-turns, I don't think Starmer has much if any more, and arguably considerably less.
People have political journeys, and most people become more conservative as they age: Tony Blair was a Trotskyist at university, for example.
I've heard it said before that leading a country really ages people, looking at pictures of leaders at the start and end of the Premiership can be quite amusing.
Never heard that being elected Opposition Leader ages you so much.
Starmer was quite content to be in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet only recently, he refused to back or support any of the people harassed for antisemitism instead tying his name to Corbyn and supporting him to the hilt. If voters had voted differently, he was content to serve in Corbyn's Cabinet.
Zero respect for him.
He speaks very highly of you. (Actually I doubt it)
Siegfried Muresan: The Prime Minister of #Poland Mateusz #Morawiecki had 5 minutes speaking time allocated in the European Parliament.
He spoke for 33 minutes.
He broke the rule the moment he entered the European Parliament. He broke a rule, he knew he broke it and did not care.
Everyone saw it
More of a priority on how long he spoke than what he had to say?
Though its weird this is one of the replies with a translation: https://twitter.com/sukip_POL/status/1450370382117093377 - I have 35 minutes and I will use my time. - Please finish - I'm finishing, but please don't disturb me
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I disagree, for two reasons. Starmer has no charisma or political judgement. I was never a huge fan of Cameron, but he at least had a modicum of both.
And Starmer is hugely dishonest and opportunistic. The editor of Socialist Challenge in his youth, then sitting in Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet, then running as a Corbynista for the Labour leadership, now pretending to be a centrist. So while I don't think Johnson has much if any credibility after all his opportunistic U-turns, I don't think Starmer has much if any more, and arguably considerably less.
People have political journeys, and most people become more conservative as they age: Tony Blair was a Trotskyist at university, for example.
Was he? I thought his Oxford contemporaries said they could never tell if he was Labour or Tory.
Siegfried Muresan: The Prime Minister of #Poland Mateusz #Morawiecki had 5 minutes speaking time allocated in the European Parliament.
He spoke for 33 minutes.
He broke the rule the moment he entered the European Parliament. He broke a rule, he knew he broke it and did not care.
Everyone saw it
More of a priority on how long he spoke than what he had to say?
Though its weird this is one of the replies with a translation: https://twitter.com/sukip_POL/status/1450370382117093377 - I have 35 minutes and I will use my time. - Please finish - I'm finishing, but please don't disturb me
At least it looks like Ursula von der Leyen had a chair to sit on.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I disagree, for two reasons. Starmer has no charisma or political judgement. I was never a huge fan of Cameron, but he at least had a modicum of both.
And Starmer is hugely dishonest and opportunistic. The editor of Socialist Challenge in his youth, then sitting in Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet, then running as a Corbynista for the Labour leadership, now pretending to be a centrist. So while I don't think Johnson has much if any credibility after all his opportunistic U-turns, I don't think Starmer has much if any more, and arguably considerably less.
People have political journeys, and most people become more conservative as they age: Tony Blair was a Trotskyist at university, for example.
Was he? I thought his Oxford contemporaries said they could never tell if he was Labour or Tory.
Yes, exactly, Blair was more interested in rock music, Mick Jagger and evangelical Christianity at Oxford than politics.
He studied law not history or PPE and never joined the Oxford Union nor even the Oxford Labour club and there is no evidence he was a Marxist. It was Cherie who got him into Labour politics when they were courting as young barristers, his father was an active Tory
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
I generally agree, but the problem with leaping to emergency restrictions is that there is very little appetite out there for them. I went into Huntingdon for my flu jab this morning (followed by the obligatory run), and mask usage was very varied. Everyone in the pharmacy wore them; in other shops I was the only person. A woman was coughing her lungs up in one shop, sans mask, and without covering her face with her elbow or hand.
How quickly old habits return ...
If Labour think emergency restrictions are needed now, then they should be saying so, loudly, volubly and with certainty.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I agree with some of that: but Cameron always had a vision - even if you disagreed with it. Starmer seems unable to project any vision he may have without writing a WORN (*) magnum opus. Events haven't helped him, as the country and media are concentrating on bigger events.
Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party.
(*) Write Once, Read Never. A common form of computer documentation.
"Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party." - pretty much the whole reason I think Sir Keir won't be PM - plus the fact he is up against a very charismatic salesman
In a way, they appear polar opposites. Starmer may have a vision (I've no idea given he seems incapable of saying it); Boris doesn't have a vision beyond the end of his nose, but can sell the snot that dribbles out by the barrel-load.
We need a hideous scientific experiment where the two are merged together. Starson or Johnmer.
(I actually quite like Starson. Very sci-fi)
I saw a clip of Blair as LotO at PMQs the other day, and he seemed like he was bossing it vs Major (the famous one "I lead my party, he follows his", seems so horribly smug watching it now), and to an extent Cameron did with Brown, from what I can recall.
Miliband and Sir Keir always seem like they are earnestly whining about it being so unfair to me; maybe it's just the lack of gravitas in their voices. They seem like kids complaining about their parents, in comparison to the last couple of LotOs who became PM
No, he doesn't come over as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. The "wooden" critique is fair enough but you're just indulging yourself with this. Surprised you haven't as yet found fault with his eyebrows btw. Or have I missed that?
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
Have you been out and about in London recently? My perception is completely accurate.
And to what extent should we continue with this when we have such high vaccination rates?
I think what you’d like to be true is driving your assessment.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
Of course Cameron failed to win a majority in 2010 too, however he did manage to deprive Labour of their majority and get enough seats to form a government with the LDs.
If Starmer does become PM it is much more likely that he would do so via the Cameron 2010 route than the Blair 1997 route, just most likely with the SNP added onto the LDs too
Indeed, that is my point.
Except that Cameron was almost always in the lead in the polls. He was consistently taken seriously as next PM, with only the very brief Brown bounce when his party wasn't in the lead.
You're rewriting history to say he was underestimated. He wasn't, he was consistently topping the polls. Starmer isn't. Not remotely the same thing.
No, Philip, I am giving an opinion on how I recall he was treated by the media and your equivalents on the other side of the political spectrum. He was a lightweight, a chameleon, lacks substance etc etc.
In case you hadn't noticed, times are a little different now from when Cameron was LoTO. The Tory Party had also already been reformed and the nutters (who are now largely in charge of the Tory Party) were largely silent. You are so partisan you desperately want Starmer to be rubbish. He isn't, but keep believing it if it makes you happy!
Once again as always you have me backwards.
I quit the Tory Party already. So especially now but even when in it, I'd quite like an Opposition that could hold the Government to account.
It isn't healthy for the nation to have only one credible party of Government and that's the situation we are in now sadly and Starmer has not changed that.
He hasn't even attempted to set out an alternative vision for the country. Blair did, Cameron did, Boris did.
Starmer just seems to want to win by default. Simply not being Corbyn and not being Boris may be enough for those who are set in their own views already and regard the PM as a "clown". But it isn't enough to become Prime Minister. He needs to do the hard work and that isn't happening.
You've quit again? The mobility boggles. You're like Big G and Churchill!
What if Frostie invokes Article 16 and tears up the Brexit deal? That'll get you back, I suppose. Until the next time ...
What do you mean? I never rejoined.
I left over the economic handling so Europe has nothing to do with it.
Next set piece I will reconsider is the Budget, but unless there's a surprisingly good Budget I don't think I'll reconsider.
Ah I see. Well, not to worry then. There won't be a surprisingly good budget.
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
I generally agree, but the problem with leaping to emergency restrictions is that there is very little appetite out there for them. I went into Huntingdon for my flu jab this morning (followed by the obligatory run), and mask usage was very varied. Everyone in the pharmacy wore them; in other shops I was the only person. A woman was coughing her lungs up in one shop, sans mask, and without covering her face with her elbow or hand.
How quickly old habits return ...
If Labour think emergency restrictions are needed now, then they should be saying so, loudly, volubly and with certainty.
(Perhaps they are, and I haven't hard them?)
Well that’s just disgusting behaviour covid or no covid. Hardly a good example. Amazing how many people on PB think we should jump back into restrictions, when we are doing better than even the best case scenario with Sage.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Anything that leads to less SNP Type MPs can only be a good thing.
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
I don't think there's an actual disagreement here: it is clear to anyone who lives in it that life in London is basically back to normal, and also (from a quick glance at the latest trackers) that case loads are currently much higher in the countryside than in the cities - in particular London.
Since the cities seem to generally have lower than average vaccination rates, and we know that increased population density tends to drive higher transmission rates, this makes little sense on the surface. Once simple explanation is that London has now mostly beaten the virus, but the rural areas are still going through the final exit wave. In which case, the winter may not be so bad unless something changes (new variant, failure of the booster program, etc).
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I agree with some of that: but Cameron always had a vision - even if you disagreed with it. Starmer seems unable to project any vision he may have without writing a WORN (*) magnum opus. Events haven't helped him, as the country and media are concentrating on bigger events.
Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party.
(*) Write Once, Read Never. A common form of computer documentation.
"Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party." - pretty much the whole reason I think Sir Keir won't be PM - plus the fact he is up against a very charismatic salesman
In a way, they appear polar opposites. Starmer may have a vision (I've no idea given he seems incapable of saying it); Boris doesn't have a vision beyond the end of his nose, but can sell the snot that dribbles out by the barrel-load.
We need a hideous scientific experiment where the two are merged together. Starson or Johnmer.
(I actually quite like Starson. Very sci-fi)
I saw a clip of Blair as LotO at PMQs the other day, and he seemed like he was bossing it vs Major (the famous one "I lead my party, he follows his", seems so horribly smug watching it now), and to an extent Cameron did with Brown, from what I can recall.
Miliband and Sir Keir always seem like they are earnestly whining about it being so unfair to me; maybe it's just the lack of gravitas in their voices. They seem like kids complaining about their parents, in comparison to the last couple of LotOs who became PM
No, he doesn't come over as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. The "wooden" critique is fair enough but you're just indulging yourself with this. Surprised you haven't as yet found fault with his eyebrows btw. Or have I missed that?
Comes over to me as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. He has a whiny voice, like Ed Miliband has, and coupled with his whole schtik being how nasty the govt and Boris are, it seems a bit "poor me"
Don't know about his eyebrows - he looks like a Teddy Boy who likes a beer to me, but Boris is no pin up either, so it doesn't really affect things
I mentioned a few days ago that I was up for a small bet on an increased majority for the Tories at anything better than 5/1. This rather reinforces that view. Does anyone know where there is a market?
Conservatives to increase their majority from 2019 (80 seats) at 2/1 with Ladbrokes
If Con MAJ is EVS, and increased majority is 2/1, that implies Con Maj less than 80 is about 5/1! Must be the worst bet in the world that 2/1
It's absolutely shocking. Beyond mug. Any PBer takes that, they don't deserve to be on here, far as I'm concerned. They'd have to be banned.
PBers probably know that bookies are not registered charities running generous systems to grant large benefits to indigent punters. (Except the odds they offered on LDs for C&A.)
Actually, they might be. In today's instalment (part 2) of the Shadsy interview, Matthew Shaddick explains that so far as political betting is concerned, neither Ladbrokes (at first) or Smarkets is particularly interested in making a profit. Rather it is seen as PR (free advertising when odds are quoted in the papers) or as, well, watch the (short) video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcjGZsJLuOE
My application for a grant from the Bookmakers Benevolent Society is in the post.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Who do you replace him with though? Burnham isn't in Parliament, and I really don't think Rayner is the answer. Nandy? Yvette Cooper?
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
I generally agree, but the problem with leaping to emergency restrictions is that there is very little appetite out there for them. I went into Huntingdon for my flu jab this morning (followed by the obligatory run), and mask usage was very varied. Everyone in the pharmacy wore them; in other shops I was the only person. A woman was coughing her lungs up in one shop, sans mask, and without covering her face with her elbow or hand.
How quickly old habits return ...
If Labour think emergency restrictions are needed now, then they should be saying so, loudly, volubly and with certainty.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
I agree that number 1 might work, but who is the Labour figure the public is crying out for? I just don't see anyone with Blair's or Wilson's political genius. And changing a leader who hasn't even faced the public yet looks a bit like panic. Or opportunism. Or both.
2 might be counterproductive, and I'm not sure the Lib Dems, hoping to win soft Tory votes in the south would be up for it.
And 3 would doubtless help, but seven seats is noise compared with the huge numbers of English small town midlands and southern marginals they need to win back.
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
Yes, still a problem on my patch. We have 4 wards and a dozen ICU beds full of covid. Only a quarter of what it was in Feb, but a long way from normal.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Who do you replace him with though? Burnham isn't in Parliament, and I really don't think Rayner is the answer. Nandy? Yvette Cooper?
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
I generally agree, but the problem with leaping to emergency restrictions is that there is very little appetite out there for them. I went into Huntingdon for my flu jab this morning (followed by the obligatory run), and mask usage was very varied. Everyone in the pharmacy wore them; in other shops I was the only person. A woman was coughing her lungs up in one shop, sans mask, and without covering her face with her elbow or hand.
How quickly old habits return ...
If Labour think emergency restrictions are needed now, then they should be saying so, loudly, volubly and with certainty.
(Perhaps they are, and I haven't hard them?)
Well that’s just disgusting behaviour covid or no covid. Hardly a good example. Amazing how many people on PB think we should jump back into restrictions, when we are doing better than even the best case scenario with Sage.
Restrictions are awful. Absolutely grim.
I agree.
Deaths are also grim.
The question is how we balance out the grimness of both. At the moment I don't see any need for further restrictions. That may (or may not) change as we go into winter.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Who do you replace him with though? Burnham isn't in Parliament, and I really don't think Rayner is the answer. Nandy? Yvette Cooper?
Nandy, Nandy, Nandy all day long.
Nandy makes Starmer look charismatic and is out of her depth at Shadow Foreign Secretary let alone as she would be as Labour leader.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Who do you replace him with though? Burnham isn't in Parliament, and I really don't think Rayner is the answer. Nandy? Yvette Cooper?
Nandy, Nandy, Nandy all day long.
Looks like a well behaved girl being told off at School for the first time, possibly for being one minute late - always on the verge of tears with the bottom lip going. Jess Phillips is the one with the attitude required
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
Have you been out and about in London recently? My perception is completely accurate.
And to what extent should we continue with this when we have such high vaccination rates?
I think what you’d like to be true is driving your assessment.
No, because I'd rather we could all return to normal life. What I don't want is a cycle of boom and bust, to coin a phrase - lots of parties followed by lots of misery followed by lots of lockdown.
If that doesn't happen, I'll be surprised but delighted.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Who do you replace him with though? Burnham isn't in Parliament, and I really don't think Rayner is the answer. Nandy? Yvette Cooper?
Nandy, Nandy, Nandy all day long.
Looks like a well behaved girl being told off at School for the first time, possibly for being one minute late - always on the verge of tears with the bottom lip going. Jess Phillips is the one with the attitude required
However the Brownites and even the Jezza fans would prefer Starmer to Jess Phillips, so they are stuck with Keir.
Labour would only consider a charismatic near enough Blairite leader like Jess Phillips after yet another general election defeat
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
But there is only a tiny chance that Lab +LD can get close to 326; so it is impossible to eliminate the SNP from the equation. Which means that from a centre right perspective the Tory campaign is based on the danger of a Lab, LD, G and SNP majority, whatever the individual party's rhetoric. And it cannot be denied. We may agree that to an extent Boris and Nicola need each other - Boris needs the SNP threat to diminish the centre left vote; Nicola needs Boris to ensure the comfortable status quo. But this is not election material, it's too complicated for the non political voter.
If no-one will play nicely with the Tories, or the DUP or the SNP then the range of options for an ungovernable outcome become immense; with a Tory majority being the only possible form of stable government. This is electoral dynamite.
Labour have to find a way of showing how a 4 party (Lab, LD, SNP, G) centre left government can work. No choice.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
I agree that number 1 might work, but who is the Labour figure the public is crying out for? I just don't see anyone with Blair's or Wilson's political genius. And changing a leader who hasn't even faced the public yet looks a bit like panic. Or opportunism. Or both.
2 might be counterproductive, and I'm not sure the Lib Dems, hoping to win soft Tory votes in the south would be up for it.
And 3 would doubtless help, but seven seats is noise compared with the huge numbers of English small town midlands and southern marginals they need to win back.
Hmm, 3 is admitting that the Sturgeon puppet strategy is working. Who will be more convincing when the Tories are playing the reverse? And consider the overtones.
Also: there is a risk of forgetting we also have Holyrood. In Scotland we see every day that the SNP and Tories are consistently opposed. Labour (pace the Bain Principle) sometimes actually agrees with the SNP when it comes to votes. The Tories, much less so.
PS A lot of Labour voters have to be won back from the SNP, as from the Tories. How does one square that with an anti-Tory and anti-SNO prgramme?
Exclusive by me in @theipaper: Sage has met just 3 times since July, is only meeting once a month, because of a lessened demand from ministers for their advice. This is despite fears of a winter wave, with cases, admissions and deaths all rising right now:
Probably because life is back to normal for most people. Morbidity is a fraction of what it was pre-vaccine and most people are learning to live with an endemic virus. In much of London, it’s like the pandemic never happened.
It's different to that in Devon, where I visited last week. More oldies maybe. Where I live in Midlands it's between those two extremes I guess.
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
It's regarded as pretty serious down here in Surrey. The Royal Surrey Hospital up the road has declared a level 4 emergency - they are out of beds for all the cases pending. Note also:
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
I generally agree, but the problem with leaping to emergency restrictions is that there is very little appetite out there for them. I went into Huntingdon for my flu jab this morning (followed by the obligatory run), and mask usage was very varied. Everyone in the pharmacy wore them; in other shops I was the only person. A woman was coughing her lungs up in one shop, sans mask, and without covering her face with her elbow or hand.
How quickly old habits return ...
If Labour think emergency restrictions are needed now, then they should be saying so, loudly, volubly and with certainty.
A clear Ministerial lead would be better even if one takes the opposite view and thinks things are basically fine. People really want clear advice.
I’m not sure as many people as you think want endless advice from politicians and/or the health lobby, especially given we are doing better than their best case scenario.
A lot of us - left and right - just want to be left to get on with our lives without the endless drumbeat, thanks.
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
Who do you replace him with though? Burnham isn't in Parliament, and I really don't think Rayner is the answer. Nandy? Yvette Cooper?
Nandy, Nandy, Nandy all day long.
Looks like a well behaved girl being told off at School for the first time, possibly for being one minute late - always on the verge of tears with the bottom lip going. Jess Phillips is the one with the attitude required
JP fails the 'can picture them standing outside No10' test as badly as Rayner does.
Corbyn really did bequeath Starmer a toxic legacy.
The problem is that Starmer isn't up to the job either.
Nonsense. I am not a Labour supporter, but Starmer has a great deal more credibility than the Clown that currently occupies No10. It is a long time before the next election. The big problem that Starmer has is not his own ability or credibility, it is that there is still a large part of the Labour Party that is even more ludicrous than many of those of the current government benches. History will judge how he does the long haul.
He reminds me a lot of Cameron: Massively underestimated by those in his own party that would rather have someone else, and derided by his opponents because they are simply too tribal or plain stupid to realise that he might just make it.
I agree with some of that: but Cameron always had a vision - even if you disagreed with it. Starmer seems unable to project any vision he may have without writing a WORN (*) magnum opus. Events haven't helped him, as the country and media are concentrating on bigger events.
Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party.
(*) Write Once, Read Never. A common form of computer documentation.
"Blair was a salesman. Cameron was also a salesman, to a lesser extent. Starmer doesn't appear to be one - and he needs to sell his vision for the country, to both the country and his own party." - pretty much the whole reason I think Sir Keir won't be PM - plus the fact he is up against a very charismatic salesman
In a way, they appear polar opposites. Starmer may have a vision (I've no idea given he seems incapable of saying it); Boris doesn't have a vision beyond the end of his nose, but can sell the snot that dribbles out by the barrel-load.
We need a hideous scientific experiment where the two are merged together. Starson or Johnmer.
(I actually quite like Starson. Very sci-fi)
I saw a clip of Blair as LotO at PMQs the other day, and he seemed like he was bossing it vs Major (the famous one "I lead my party, he follows his", seems so horribly smug watching it now), and to an extent Cameron did with Brown, from what I can recall.
Miliband and Sir Keir always seem like they are earnestly whining about it being so unfair to me; maybe it's just the lack of gravitas in their voices. They seem like kids complaining about their parents, in comparison to the last couple of LotOs who became PM
No, he doesn't come over as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. The "wooden" critique is fair enough but you're just indulging yourself with this. Surprised you haven't as yet found fault with his eyebrows btw. Or have I missed that?
Comes over to me as whining to his parents about it being so unfair. He has a whiny voice, like Ed Miliband has, and coupled with his whole schtik being how nasty the govt and Boris are, it seems a bit "poor me"
Don't know about his eyebrows - he looks like a Teddy Boy who likes a beer to me, but Boris is no pin up either, so it doesn't really affect things
Roundhead vs Cavalier. Ye Olde English psychodrama never went away.
The Nandy-doubters haven’t been following her closely enough.
She’s Worcester woman’s younger neice, with a good education. She’s passionate, but doesn’t frighten the horses.
A belligerent person like Jess Philips or Angela Rayner might “bring the fight to the Tories” but will turn off middle Britain.
Jess Phillips is charismatic and passionate, unlike Nandy but centrist too unlike Rayner so would not turn off Tories. Nandy in the Labour leadership debate also said she wanted a republic which would turn off Middle England.
However at the moment Phillips is still too rightwing for Labour
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
I agree that number 1 might work, but who is the Labour figure the public is crying out for? I just don't see anyone with Blair's or Wilson's political genius. And changing a leader who hasn't even faced the public yet looks a bit like panic. Or opportunism. Or both.
2 might be counterproductive, and I'm not sure the Lib Dems, hoping to win soft Tory votes in the south would be up for it.
And 3 would doubtless help, but seven seats is noise compared with the huge numbers of English small town midlands and southern marginals they need to win back.
1. Nandy, Nandy, Nandy
2. De facto, not de jure. It needs to be organised via a few symbolic but meaningful gestures. The Lib Dems should be given implicit license to go for it in 20 odd Tory seats
3. I said “magnificent seven” because it’s memorable. it’s about focusing Labour’s efforts in Scotland but most importantly deflecting the inevitable criticism by the Tories (and their compliant friends in the media).
Local news says that UKHSA isn’t just dumping historic positive tests into the SW figures, but there are huge jumps. If it’s not backfilling, then it must be retests, and will surely be an artificial hump. We hope...
Labour, as well as dumping Keir, need a Scottish gambit.
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir 2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems 3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
But there is only a tiny chance that Lab +LD can get close to 326; so it is impossible to eliminate the SNP from the equation. Which means that from a centre right perspective the Tory campaign is based on the danger of a Lab, LD, G and SNP majority, whatever the individual party's rhetoric. And it cannot be denied. We may agree that to an extent Boris and Nicola need each other - Boris needs the SNP threat to diminish the centre left vote; Nicola needs Boris to ensure the comfortable status quo. But this is not election material, it's too complicated for the non political voter.
If no-one will play nicely with the Tories, or the DUP or the SNP then the range of options for an ungovernable outcome become immense; with a Tory majority being the only possible form of stable government. This is electoral dynamite.
Labour have to find a way of showing how a 4 party (Lab, LD, SNP, G) centre left government can work. No choice.
I agree somewhat on the detail, but disagree on the greater substance.
Labour are sleepwalking to defeat.
They need a strategy, and we all know that the chances of outright success are slim. I have outlined a strategy which gets them closer, and maybe into government.
The Nandy-doubters haven’t been following her closely enough.
She’s Worcester woman’s younger neice, with a good education. She’s passionate, but doesn’t frighten the horses.
A belligerent person like Jess Philips or Angela Rayner might “bring the fight to the Tories” but will turn off middle Britain.
She is articulate and compassionate, and doesn't spout vacuous piffle, but does look and sound a bit drippy. I am green on her but not entirely convinced.
Still a Rayner fan (and Philips too) I like a bit of a fighter.
Comments
This dude here.
https://twitter.com/willcllr?lang=en
I once went in his car when campaigning in Enfield and campaigned in a by election in his ward, he is no longer on the council
He was rather vociferous in his views, I believe the suspension was when he asked whether the Turkish family of a Labour councillor had “brought a classroom with them.” Although he is BME rather than white nationalist
https://enfielddispatch.co.uk/by-election-called-after-independent-kicked-off-council/
However voting SNP is pretty stupid if you want no change.
I guess you could say - Half of Scots are Morons
What if Frostie invokes Article 16 and tears up the Brexit deal? That'll get you back, I suppose. Until the next time ...
The coronavirus act was extended by 6 months today. How long do Britons want to keep it in place for?
Repeal now: 13%
Repeal before Mar 2022: 10%
Repeal in Mar 2022: 31%
Repeal after Mar 2022: 20%
Never repeal: 9%
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1450505818072354821
In Devon the ridiculous walk to the restaurant/cafe table then mask off thing is still alive and kicking. A friend, who broadly agrees with me over this, says he does it if he can see many others are wearing masks. When I asked why he said "conformity I guess - not because I think there is a point to it". So the previous stage of obedience to state authority is being replaced by an obedience to what is deemed polite.
I find both stages very worrying. As far as I am concerned it is no longer polite to wear a mask if you are vaccinated.
https://enfielddispatch.co.uk/by-election-called-after-independent-kicked-off-council/
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1450506331987791888
This is part of the reason for grade inflation. Not dumbing down but the ruthless adoption of better learning strategies.
But the education system might be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
In fact at this stage of his leadership not only did he lead in every single poll, he had led his party into the lead in every single poll not just in May but every single poll for the entire year to date. Indeed his party had led in the polls in almost every single poll in the past twelve months by this stage.
It was only when Brown became PM in June that things temporarily changed.
I left over the economic handling so Europe has nothing to do with it.
Next set piece I will reconsider is the Budget, but unless there's a surprisingly good Budget I don't think I'll reconsider.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcjGZsJLuOE
Brown did take the lead from June yes but even in May 2007 the last 2 polls only gave the Tories a 5% lead and a 4% lead.
Once Brown took over on June 27th Labour led every single poll bar one which gave the Tories a 1% lead until after Osborne's IHT cut proposal at the Tory conference in the first week of October
Repeal now: 13%
Repeal before Mar 2022: 10%
Repeal in Mar 2022: 31%
Repeal after Mar 2022: 20%
Never repeal: 9%
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1450505818072354821?s=20
Never heard that being elected Opposition Leader ages you so much.
Starmer was quite content to be in Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet only recently, he refused to back or support any of the people harassed for antisemitism instead tying his name to Corbyn and supporting him to the hilt. If voters had voted differently, he was content to serve in Corbyn's Cabinet.
Zero respect for him.
Tonight people on Octopus Agile Tariff will be paid 2.21p per unit to use electricity. So I forecast it will be windy.
Plunge pricing alert for Octopus Agile electricity. First time in weeks that the price has dipped below the 35p/unit cap ** by more than a couple of pence.
Tomorrow morning they’ll pay 2.21/unit (just for 30 mins) but between midnight and 06:00 the average unit price is 5.602p.
Sunamp *, washing machine and dishwasher will be in the starting blocks at midnight.
https://forum.buildhub.org.uk/topic/20070-octopus-agile-time-of-use-tariff/page/3/?tab=comments#comment-366144
* A Sunamp is a phase change heat battery, that stores energy far more effectively than an insulated hot water tank. But is still rather expensive.
** The 35p per unit relates to the price around the peak period in the evening. You need to be able to time shift loads to avoid it.
https://twitter.com/SMuresan/status/1450371145866301444
Siegfried Muresan:
The Prime Minister of #Poland Mateusz #Morawiecki had 5 minutes speaking time allocated in the European Parliament.
He spoke for 33 minutes.
He broke the rule the moment he entered the European Parliament.
He broke a rule, he knew he broke it and did not care.
Everyone saw it
In fact, I've just done it. 60-40 no-yes.
Though its weird this is one of the replies with a translation: https://twitter.com/sukip_POL/status/1450370382117093377
- I have 35 minutes and I will use my time.
- Please finish
- I'm finishing, but please don't disturb me
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/19/uk-records-highest-covid-deaths-since-march
With respect to Anabobazina and others - I think that what you'd like to be true is driving your assessment, but the more we behave as if the virus never happened, the worse the winter will be. And, as usual, the Government will doze along until they suddenly leap into emergency restrictions.
Again, I don't believe you are who you pretend to be.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/scotland-decides/results
He studied law not history or PPE and never joined the Oxford Union nor even the Oxford Labour club and there is no evidence he was a Marxist. It was Cherie who got him into Labour politics when they were courting as young barristers, his father was an active Tory
How quickly old habits return ...
If Labour think emergency restrictions are needed now, then they should be saying so, loudly, volubly and with certainty.
(Perhaps they are, and I haven't hard them?)
The road to Westminster runs through Scotland.
Unless Labour look like a viable player in Scotland, the Tories will play the “Sturgeon’s puppet” card - and win.
Labour should announce now they plan to target the “Magnificent Seven” - the top seven Scottish targets they might hope to turn from the SNP.
And they need to position the SNP as aiders and abettors of Tory rule (and as we know there is truth to the idea that Boris and Nicola exist in symbiotic stasis).
I’m summary, a successful strategy for Labour looks like:
1. Dumping Keir
2. A de facto anti-Tory alliance with the Lib Dems
3. Publicly targeting the “Magnificent Seven”.
There is a decent possibility - 25%? - that a Lab/Lib tally could outperform the Tories.
And to what extent should we continue with this when we have such high vaccination rates?
I think what you’d like to be true is driving your assessment.
He only looks “OK” compared to Corbyn and indeed Johnson.
Tory support is shallow. As soon as there is a viable looking and sounding alternative, people will shift.
Restrictions are awful. Absolutely grim.
Since the cities seem to generally have lower than average vaccination rates, and we know that increased population density tends to drive higher transmission rates, this makes little sense on the surface. Once simple explanation is that London has now mostly beaten the virus, but the rural areas are still going through the final exit wave. In which case, the winter may not be so bad unless something changes (new variant, failure of the booster program, etc).
Don't know about his eyebrows - he looks like a Teddy Boy who likes a beer to me, but Boris is no pin up either, so it doesn't really affect things
Burnham, Khan and Rayner all poll worse against Boris than Keir does
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1450147234188779523?s=20
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1450157351999311875?s=20
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1450160107485122560?s=20
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1450162357079093255?s=20
A clear Ministerial lead would be better even if one takes the opposite view and thinks things are basically fine. People really want clear advice.
2 might be counterproductive, and I'm not sure the Lib Dems, hoping to win soft Tory votes in the south would be up for it.
And 3 would doubtless help, but seven seats is noise compared with the huge numbers of English small town midlands and southern marginals they need to win back.
Maintain taxes at their current level: 40%
Lower taxes: 28%
Raise taxes: 21%
Only 19% of 2019 Conservative voters and 25% of 2019 Labour voters want to raise taxes
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1450431692959801345?s=20
Deaths are also grim.
The question is how we balance out the grimness of both. At the moment I don't see any need for further restrictions. That may (or may not) change as we go into winter.
She is a middle ranking Minister at most
If that doesn't happen, I'll be surprised but delighted.
Labour would only consider a charismatic near enough Blairite leader like Jess Phillips after yet another general election defeat
If no-one will play nicely with the Tories, or the DUP or the SNP then the range of options for an ungovernable outcome become immense; with a Tory majority being the only possible form of stable government. This is electoral dynamite.
Labour have to find a way of showing how a 4 party (Lab, LD, SNP, G) centre left government can work. No choice.
I imagine the 21% would shrink pretty quickly if that happened.
The Nandy-doubters haven’t been following her closely enough.
She’s Worcester woman’s younger neice, with a good education. She’s passionate, but doesn’t frighten the horses.
A belligerent person like Jess Philips or Angela Rayner might “bring the fight to the Tories” but will turn off middle Britain.
Also: there is a risk of forgetting we also have Holyrood. In Scotland we see every day that the SNP and Tories are consistently opposed. Labour (pace the Bain Principle) sometimes actually agrees with the SNP when it comes to votes. The Tories, much less so.
PS A lot of Labour voters have to be won back from the SNP, as from the Tories. How does one square that with an anti-Tory and anti-SNO prgramme?
A lot of us - left and right - just want to be left to get on with our lives without the endless drumbeat, thanks.
However at the moment Phillips is still too rightwing for Labour
2. De facto, not de jure. It needs to be organised via a few symbolic but meaningful gestures. The Lib Dems should be given implicit license to go for it in 20 odd Tory seats
3. I said “magnificent seven” because it’s memorable. it’s about focusing Labour’s efforts in Scotland but most importantly deflecting the inevitable criticism by the Tories (and their compliant friends in the media).
Labour are sleepwalking to defeat.
They need a strategy, and we all know that the chances of outright success are slim. I have outlined a strategy which gets them closer, and maybe into government.
Still a Rayner fan (and Philips too) I like a bit of a fighter.