Howdy, Stranger!

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

Labour flops in OBS as CON holds with 51.5% of vote – politicalbetting.com

135

Comments

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,697
    edited December 2021
    Stocky said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Con on course to win the 2023 general election with a reduced majority! :)

    Even if a CP supporter, would you want another term of Johnson though??
    I don't mind him to be honest but in any case I imagine he'll retire half way through the 2023-2028 parliament then Con will lose the 2028 general election to Labour.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    This cat breast-feeding thing has got me thinking about how weird it is that humans drink cow's and sheep's milk.

    Well, that is weird, because we had to evolve the ability to digest it.

    The crucial point in the story about the "breastfed cat" is that the cat didn't want to latch on and was distressed about the way it was swaddled. I don't know what the story is with the cat owner, but if it were in the UK I imagine the RSPCA would now be involved.
    Ok, I didn't read the article. But still, the idea of inter-species suckling is suddenly hurting my brain.
    And now I'm seeing it everywhere! Romulus and Remus. Tori Amos.
    For some reason ice cream made from human milk is seen as more weird than ice cream made from cattle milk.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,883
    MrEd said:

    So it is likely those voters will come out and vote - not because they love BJ but because their view on anyone non-Labour is that they will favour minority groups over the WWC.

    The WWC do things like this:



    They should be the least favoured group in the country.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    Dura_Ace said:

    MrEd said:

    So it is likely those voters will come out and vote - not because they love BJ but because their view on anyone non-Labour is that they will favour minority groups over the WWC.

    The WWC do things like this:



    They should be the least favoured group in the country.
    Burn it all down. Everything. Start again with no people.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Sandpit said:

    Is it only me, but I keep reading Omicron as 0 micron. As in zero microns.

    Its hard to take something named so tiny seriously.

    (PS yes I know covid genuinely is smaller than a micron)

    Is it pronounced O-micron, or Ommi-cron?
    It means little o as against omega, big o, so it's ommicron but O mega.
  • algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
  • Chris said:

    .

    Chris said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting to speculate what a highly transmissible, highly reinfective Omicron might do to the world. It will surely sweep through every continent in months if not weeks

    It will mightily impact unvaxxed countries but it won’t be great for vaxxed, unless they have brilliant booster campaigns and they can somehow protect the unjabbed entirely

    Anyone who thinks they are immune due to prior infection must now rethink

    Will lockdowns even work against this variant?

    One thing to remember (learn?) is that reinfections tend to be milder, and this will likely be the case here too.
    It’s too early to say for sure, but the steep rise in hospitalisations in Gauteng suggests otherwise. It is thought many of them are reinfections


    We just don’t know for certain. Every day tells us more. In 2-3 weeks we will get the first Omicron deaths. Perhaps it will be more transmissible and reinfective but less lethal? 🙏
    The point is that any difference in severity (unless it's hugely more severe, which I think we can already see it's not) is a one-off difference in terms of its influence on hospitalisations and deaths. (Though it's obviously something that we very much want to know as individuals in order to assess our personal risk.)

    The overall difference in transmissibility is something whose effect on the numbers of infections will compound every generation - that is, roughly every 5 days.

    The difference in transmissibility is going to be the crucial factor in influencing the impact on the health service, and that is what we already have a much better handle on. Even for the UK, unless there's an alternative explanation, the S-gene dropout data are indicating a big advantage in transmissibility over Delta.

    We need to have a way of coping with a variant that is much more transmissible than Delta overall (taking both intrinsic transmissibility and immune escape into account). And also taking account of the fact that it's already here, apparently in significant numbers.
    We have a way of coping. Get vaccinated, get boosters and cope as well as we can.

    Not everyone will survive but that's a fact of life, stop being hysterical about it.
    I'm stating facts and what follows logically from them. Apparently you think we need to do no more than vaccinate. If so, I don't believe you have thought out the consequences.
    What consequences?

    Most people will live, some people will die, the world will keep on spinning. The NHS will be "under crisis" but it is every winter.

    Life must go on.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,934
    edited December 2021
    Farooq said:

    This cat breast-feeding thing has got me thinking about how weird it is that humans drink cow's and sheep's milk.

    You can buy cat's milk at any supermarket but it turns out it is milk for cats rather than milk from cats. It seems cats are lactose-intolerant.
    https://www.whiskas.co.uk/cat-food-products/cat-milk
  • Sandpit said:

    Is it only me, but I keep reading Omicron as 0 micron. As in zero microns.

    Its hard to take something named so tiny seriously.

    (PS yes I know covid genuinely is smaller than a micron)

    Is it pronounced O-micron, or Ommi-cron?
    It's pronounced "Omigod" . As in "Omigod all the Christmas parties are getting cancelled, it's the end of the world as we know it."
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343
    Sandpit said:

    Is it only me, but I keep reading Omicron as 0 micron. As in zero microns.

    Its hard to take something named so tiny seriously.

    (PS yes I know covid genuinely is smaller than a micron)

    Is it pronounced O-micron, or Ommi-cron?
    You can choose. Logic suggests this:
    Omicron just mean small 'o'. (As in box)
    Whereas Omega means great 'o'. (As in boots or Oh)

    So omicron should be pronounced short o followed by micron
    Omega should be pronounced Oh mega.

    This leaves lots of unanswered questions about all the other vowels of course.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625
    Dura_Ace said:

    MrEd said:

    So it is likely those voters will come out and vote - not because they love BJ but because their view on anyone non-Labour is that they will favour minority groups over the WWC.

    The WWC do things like this:



    They should be the least favoured group in the country.

    After the voting of 2rd December
    The Secretary of the Writers' Union
    Had leaflets distributed on the Regents Canal Walk
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the commentariat
    And could only win it back
    By increased Ken Loach film watching quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler
    for the commentariat
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Didn't four of the seven die?
  • Sandpit said:

    Is it only me, but I keep reading Omicron as 0 micron. As in zero microns.

    Its hard to take something named so tiny seriously.

    (PS yes I know covid genuinely is smaller than a micron)

    Is it pronounced O-micron, or Ommi-cron?
    It is a Greek letter and we have a Prime Minister who is learned in classical languages, so pay attention during the next Downing Street presser.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,129
    edited December 2021
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Thread with some informed guesses on Omicron immune evasion and infectivity. Neither good news.
    https://twitter.com/TWenseleers/status/1466501989500653568

    The unknown at this point is how it compares in disease severity, and how protective are vaccines and/or prior infection in this respect (they do not seem to be greatly so against infection).

    Jesus. That’s one depressing thread

    At one point he speculates that Omicron might have an R of 40, making it the most infectious disease in the history of the universe, but then he falls back on the (much more likely) answer that it is simultaneously more transmissible (4-6 x Delta?) PLUS it is highly reinfective.

    Basically, the virus ran out of people to infect, for the first time, in SA, so it learned how to come back and duff them up all over again

    If that's the case then the booster isn't going to cut it - we need a new vaccine...
    That was indeed a bleak thread.

    We are just left hoping he is completely wrong, otherwise...
    What struck me was the way he completely vindicated that infamous early graph by a Saffer epidemiologist giving Omicron a 500% transmission advantage over Delta. At the time (barely a week ago? Less?) everyone laughed and dismissed it as some mad guy scare-mongering. Now it looks quite prescient
    I feel like heading back under the duvet to be honest. :disappointed:
    I’ve been under a duvet for 48 hours anyway, but yeah. Bleak. Definitely the bleakest moment since the onset of Delta

    I don’t see how we escape a horrible winter, now, with associated lockdowns. Unless Omicron rips through so fast it doesn’t matter
    I noticed you'd been unusually quiet for a while. I think I was the only one who showed any concern about your absence. That might have been partly because I was impatient to call you a nympholept!

    Oh, and I'm glad you're still with us and hope you recover swiftly.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    The Lancet paper looks great for AZ primed people! Especially under 70s who got the Moderna booster, massive uplift in t-cell response and antibodies.

    Going to check the NHS website a lot this evening as I suspect they'll make the backend changes before the weekend and announce it in a press conference Monday evening. I'm informed that 30+ will become eligible before Xmas but not by a lot. 18+ will be waiting until early January.
  • algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    No complaints here. If the Tories think that portraying Sturgeon as the power broker is a good idea, then feel free.
  • Putting #OldBexleyAndSidcup in context: compared to all other by-election defences by a governing party since 1997.

    The 10 point swing against the Conservatives (in yellow) is below the average of 16 points since 1997, and is a touch smaller than most other recent defences.




    https://twitter.com/jamesjohnson252/status/1466666810963644421?s=20
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Thread with some informed guesses on Omicron immune evasion and infectivity. Neither good news.
    https://twitter.com/TWenseleers/status/1466501989500653568

    The unknown at this point is how it compares in disease severity, and how protective are vaccines and/or prior infection in this respect (they do not seem to be greatly so against infection).

    Jesus. That’s one depressing thread

    At one point he speculates that Omicron might have an R of 40, making it the most infectious disease in the history of the universe, but then he falls back on the (much more likely) answer that it is simultaneously more transmissible (4-6 x Delta?) PLUS it is highly reinfective.

    Basically, the virus ran out of people to infect, for the first time, in SA, so it learned how to come back and duff them up all over again

    If that's the case then the booster isn't going to cut it - we need a new vaccine...
    That was indeed a bleak thread.

    We are just left hoping he is completely wrong, otherwise...
    What struck me was the way he completely vindicated that infamous early graph by a Saffer epidemiologist giving Omicron a 500% transmission advantage over Delta. At the time (barely a week ago? Less?) everyone laughed and dismissed it as some mad guy scare-mongering. Now it looks quite prescient
    I feel like heading back under the duvet to be honest. :disappointed:
    I’ve been under a duvet for 48 hours anyway, but yeah. Bleak. Definitely the bleakest moment since the onset of Delta

    I don’t see how we escape a horrible winter, now, with associated lockdowns. Unless Omicron rips through so fast it doesn’t matter
    I noticed you'd been unusually quiet for a while. I think I was the only one who showed any concern about your absence. That might have been partly because I was impatient to call you a nympholept!
    Can you please stop using that word? It makes me disappear down a pre-Raphaelite rabbit hole and I have other things to do.
  • MaxPB said:

    The Lancet paper looks great for AZ primed people! Especially under 70s who got the Moderna booster, massive uplift in t-cell response and antibodies.

    Going to check the NHS website a lot this evening as I suspect they'll make the backend changes before the weekend and announce it in a press conference Monday evening. I'm informed that 30+ will become eligible before Xmas but not by a lot. 18+ will be waiting until early January.

    That's fantastic news and reinforces that we should get our jabs but nothing else, life must go on.

    Though I would be in favour of a Covid Tax on anyone unvaccinated, just as there's tobacco duty on smokers. 2% extra on income tax, that is zero-rated if you've had your vaccine.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    This cat breast-feeding thing has got me thinking about how weird it is that humans drink cow's and sheep's milk.

    Well, that is weird, because we had to evolve the ability to digest it.

    The crucial point in the story about the "breastfed cat" is that the cat didn't want to latch on and was distressed about the way it was swaddled. I don't know what the story is with the cat owner, but if it were in the UK I imagine the RSPCA would now be involved.
    Ok, I didn't read the article. But still, the idea of inter-species suckling is suddenly hurting my brain.
    And now I'm seeing it everywhere! Romulus and Remus. Tori Amos.
    For some reason ice cream made from human milk is seen as more weird than ice cream made from cattle milk.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011
    It's the dessert of choice among the trend conscious under 10 months old in the soft south. Up here it's ice cream from fox milk mixed with grit and jackdaw liver for the babies.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,092
    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands
  • Sandpit said:

    Is it only me, but I keep reading Omicron as 0 micron. As in zero microns.

    Its hard to take something named so tiny seriously.

    (PS yes I know covid genuinely is smaller than a micron)

    Is it pronounced O-micron, or Ommi-cron?
    It is a Greek letter and we have a Prime Minister who is learned in classical languages, so pay attention during the next Downing Street presser.
    He called it Ωmicron the other day, then quickly corrected himself to Omicron.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772

    Tories must be pleased to have stayed above 50% last night, but there remain concerning signs. What would kill them would be the return of the Nigel...

    I'm sure Farage is touched by your faith in his electoral appeal, but he appears to have more sense.

    He knows he spent many years campaigning for UKIP not getting very far until the great financial crash smashed the status quo. He has no interest in plugging away again now, struggling to save deposits.

    That's why he walked away from UKIP after the Brexit referendum - he could see where it would head once the Tories embraced Brexit. It's why he only returned to the Brexit Party when it was clear that May was stuck. And it was he executed a strategic retreat at GE2019 to avoid complete humiliation.

    Farage won't return to front-line politics until after the Tories are in trouble on their right flank. His return would be symptomatic of those troubles, rather than the cause of them.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Thread with some informed guesses on Omicron immune evasion and infectivity. Neither good news.
    https://twitter.com/TWenseleers/status/1466501989500653568

    The unknown at this point is how it compares in disease severity, and how protective are vaccines and/or prior infection in this respect (they do not seem to be greatly so against infection).

    Jesus. That’s one depressing thread

    At one point he speculates that Omicron might have an R of 40, making it the most infectious disease in the history of the universe, but then he falls back on the (much more likely) answer that it is simultaneously more transmissible (4-6 x Delta?) PLUS it is highly reinfective.

    Basically, the virus ran out of people to infect, for the first time, in SA, so it learned how to come back and duff them up all over again

    If that's the case then the booster isn't going to cut it - we need a new vaccine...
    That was indeed a bleak thread.

    We are just left hoping he is completely wrong, otherwise...
    What struck me was the way he completely vindicated that infamous early graph by a Saffer epidemiologist giving Omicron a 500% transmission advantage over Delta. At the time (barely a week ago? Less?) everyone laughed and dismissed it as some mad guy scare-mongering. Now it looks quite prescient
    I feel like heading back under the duvet to be honest. :disappointed:
    I’ve been under a duvet for 48 hours anyway, but yeah. Bleak. Definitely the bleakest moment since the onset of Delta

    I don’t see how we escape a horrible winter, now, with associated lockdowns. Unless Omicron rips through so fast it doesn’t matter
    I noticed you'd been unusually quiet for a while. I think I was the only one who showed any concern about your absence. That might have been partly because I was impatient to call you a nympholept!
    Can you please stop using that word? It makes me disappear down a pre-Raphaelite rabbit hole and I have other things to do.
    And it doesn't end there. You say pre-Raphaelite and my thoughts turn to the divine Angela.
  • IanB2 said:

    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands

    Blimey, must have been big news overnight, what on earth happened to the other 173 countries?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    The Tory hold means my OBS bet is still live.

    Conservative December by-election double
    CONSERVATIVE DECEMBER BY-ELECTION DOUBLE
    Win Old Bexley and Sidcup only
    SIDE
    BUY
    STAKE
    £10.00
    PRICE
    4.6
    MATCHED
    £10.00
    1
    North Shropshire by-election
    NORTH SHROPSHIRE BY-ELECTION
    Liberal Democrats (Helen Morgan)
    SIDE
    BUY
    STAKE
    £29.86
    PRICE
    3.6839 (Avg.)
    MATCHED
    £29.86
  • Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    Tory propaganda is aimed 100% at English voters. They couldn’t give a hoot about how their communications are perceived furth of that country. It is both their strength and their weakness.
  • Sandpit said:

    Is it only me, but I keep reading Omicron as 0 micron. As in zero microns.

    Its hard to take something named so tiny seriously.

    (PS yes I know covid genuinely is smaller than a micron)

    Is it pronounced O-micron, or Ommi-cron?
    It is a Greek letter and we have a Prime Minister who is learned in classical languages, so pay attention during the next Downing Street presser.
    He called it Ωmicron the other day, then quickly corrected himself to Omicron.
    No wonder he never got a first.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 46,268

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Thread with some informed guesses on Omicron immune evasion and infectivity. Neither good news.
    https://twitter.com/TWenseleers/status/1466501989500653568

    The unknown at this point is how it compares in disease severity, and how protective are vaccines and/or prior infection in this respect (they do not seem to be greatly so against infection).

    Jesus. That’s one depressing thread

    At one point he speculates that Omicron might have an R of 40, making it the most infectious disease in the history of the universe, but then he falls back on the (much more likely) answer that it is simultaneously more transmissible (4-6 x Delta?) PLUS it is highly reinfective.

    Basically, the virus ran out of people to infect, for the first time, in SA, so it learned how to come back and duff them up all over again

    If that's the case then the booster isn't going to cut it - we need a new vaccine...
    That was indeed a bleak thread.

    We are just left hoping he is completely wrong, otherwise...
    What struck me was the way he completely vindicated that infamous early graph by a Saffer epidemiologist giving Omicron a 500% transmission advantage over Delta. At the time (barely a week ago? Less?) everyone laughed and dismissed it as some mad guy scare-mongering. Now it looks quite prescient
    I feel like heading back under the duvet to be honest. :disappointed:
    I’ve been under a duvet for 48 hours anyway, but yeah. Bleak. Definitely the bleakest moment since the onset of Delta

    I don’t see how we escape a horrible winter, now, with associated lockdowns. Unless Omicron rips through so fast it doesn’t matter
    I noticed you'd been unusually quiet for a while. I think I was the only one who showed any concern about your absence. That might have been partly because I was impatient to call you a nympholept!

    Oh, and I'm glad you're still with us and hope you recover swiftly.
    Ta. I’m not going quietly, if I go
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,603
    Leon said:
    Honestly, this is the best bet. Right now everyone is working from the same tiny dataset. Some people see doom wherever they look and write mega threads on twitter reflective of that view point. Others see the opposite and do likewise. There's probably another two weeks before we get modelled efficacy for triple dosed people and exact binding efficiency dilution for Omicron, everything else before that is, IMO, varying degrees of bullshit.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    Dura_Ace said:

    MrEd said:

    So it is likely those voters will come out and vote - not because they love BJ but because their view on anyone non-Labour is that they will favour minority groups over the WWC.

    The WWC do things like this:



    They should be the least favoured group in the country.

    After the voting of 2rd December
    The Secretary of the Writers' Union
    Had leaflets distributed on the Regents Canal Walk
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the commentariat
    And could only win it back
    By increased Ken Loach film watching quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler
    for the commentariat
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?
    Nice hat-tip to the Regent’s Canal, which I live three minutes from, run down every second day, and on which I once encountered a puffing Boris Johnson.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343

    Putting #OldBexleyAndSidcup in context: compared to all other by-election defences by a governing party since 1997.

    The 10 point swing against the Conservatives (in yellow) is below the average of 16 points since 1997, and is a touch smaller than most other recent defences.




    https://twitter.com/jamesjohnson252/status/1466666810963644421?s=20

    That is interesting. I think Labour can take little comfort from this, and leaves them still with a bit of work to do to form their rainbow alliance.

    A key question is whether they pretend to go all out to win, which they can't, and therefore evade the Scottish question until afterwards or face up to having a policy in advance. It is a central question the media and the Tories will not stop asking, and the barrage of questions will start in the second half of next year. ("We may be only a year from an early election, what will Labour do about the SNP.... etc")

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited December 2021
    Feeling a bit better today, was in bed by 8 last night. Booster is defo a bigger effect than the original jabs.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    algarkirk said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    This cat breast-feeding thing has got me thinking about how weird it is that humans drink cow's and sheep's milk.

    Well, that is weird, because we had to evolve the ability to digest it.

    The crucial point in the story about the "breastfed cat" is that the cat didn't want to latch on and was distressed about the way it was swaddled. I don't know what the story is with the cat owner, but if it were in the UK I imagine the RSPCA would now be involved.
    Ok, I didn't read the article. But still, the idea of inter-species suckling is suddenly hurting my brain.
    And now I'm seeing it everywhere! Romulus and Remus. Tori Amos.
    For some reason ice cream made from human milk is seen as more weird than ice cream made from cattle milk.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011
    It's the dessert of choice among the trend conscious under 10 months old in the soft south. Up here it's ice cream from fox milk mixed with grit and jackdaw liver for the babies.

    Aye, in posh parts o' North. Some of us couldn' afford jackdaw liver mind.
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    edited December 2021
    The sense I get at the moment with Omicron is that it's:
    1. More transmissible than Delta.
    2. Largely escapes immunity from infection.
    3. Reduces immunity from vaccination, but not enough to worry a population with three doses.

    Does that sound about right?

    If so then implications for the UK are:
    (a) We might worry a bit if uptake of the third dose is lower than the first two in the over-50s.
    (b) The unvaccinated will catch Omicron even if they've previously caught Delta.

    That's probably just bad enough to cause difficulties, depending on how the boosters go. Vaccination is all.

    Edit: Looks to be about 10% of oldsters who had the second dose, but not a third. Those people need reaching.
  • Tories must be pleased to have stayed above 50% last night, but there remain concerning signs. What would kill them would be the return of the Nigel...

    I'm sure Farage is touched by your faith in his electoral appeal, but he appears to have more sense.

    He knows he spent many years campaigning for UKIP not getting very far until the great financial crash smashed the status quo. He has no interest in plugging away again now, struggling to save deposits.

    That's why he walked away from UKIP after the Brexit referendum - he could see where it would head once the Tories embraced Brexit. It's why he only returned to the Brexit Party when it was clear that May was stuck. And it was he executed a strategic retreat at GE2019 to avoid complete humiliation.

    Farage won't return to front-line politics until after the Tories are in trouble on their right flank. His return would be symptomatic of those troubles, rather than the cause of them.
    Well said.

    The only reason he ever got anywhere was because there was an issue that the main parties weren't dealing with (Europe) and the European Parliament wasn't taken that seriously, plus provided an opportunity to vent on the first issue and the stupid voting system in the European Parliament.

    In Westminster with First Past the Post and without the European issue or the European Parliament platform . . . he's got more sense than to get involved.
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    edited December 2021

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
  • Farooq said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Didn't four of the seven die?
    Several decades since I saw that film, so I’m a D/K.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775
    algarkirk said:

    Putting #OldBexleyAndSidcup in context: compared to all other by-election defences by a governing party since 1997.

    The 10 point swing against the Conservatives (in yellow) is below the average of 16 points since 1997, and is a touch smaller than most other recent defences.




    https://twitter.com/jamesjohnson252/status/1466666810963644421?s=20

    That is interesting. I think Labour can take little comfort from this, and leaves them still with a bit of work to do to form their rainbow alliance.

    A key question is whether they pretend to go all out to win, which they can't, and therefore evade the Scottish question until afterwards or face up to having a policy in advance. It is a central question the media and the Tories will not stop asking, and the barrage of questions will start in the second half of next year. ("We may be only a year from an early election, what will Labour do about the SNP.... etc")

    Actually, that chart is profoundly uninteresting. For starters, it's missing a whole bunch of by-elections. Anything with a swing towards the government has been excluded it seems. You can't cherry pick your data, then do an average, and expect to learn anything profound.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094
    IanB2 said:

    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands

    " drank to the point of drunkenness"

    Scientific definition, dat.
  • algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Thread with some informed guesses on Omicron immune evasion and infectivity. Neither good news.
    https://twitter.com/TWenseleers/status/1466501989500653568

    The unknown at this point is how it compares in disease severity, and how protective are vaccines and/or prior infection in this respect (they do not seem to be greatly so against infection).

    Jesus. That’s one depressing thread

    At one point he speculates that Omicron might have an R of 40, making it the most infectious disease in the history of the universe, but then he falls back on the (much more likely) answer that it is simultaneously more transmissible (4-6 x Delta?) PLUS it is highly reinfective.

    Basically, the virus ran out of people to infect, for the first time, in SA, so it learned how to come back and duff them up all over again

    If that's the case then the booster isn't going to cut it - we need a new vaccine...
    That was indeed a bleak thread.

    We are just left hoping he is completely wrong, otherwise...
    What struck me was the way he completely vindicated that infamous early graph by a Saffer epidemiologist giving Omicron a 500% transmission advantage over Delta. At the time (barely a week ago? Less?) everyone laughed and dismissed it as some mad guy scare-mongering. Now it looks quite prescient
    I feel like heading back under the duvet to be honest. :disappointed:
    I’ve been under a duvet for 48 hours anyway, but yeah. Bleak. Definitely the bleakest moment since the onset of Delta

    I don’t see how we escape a horrible winter, now, with associated lockdowns. Unless Omicron rips through so fast it doesn’t matter
    I noticed you'd been unusually quiet for a while. I think I was the only one who showed any concern about your absence. That might have been partly because I was impatient to call you a nympholept!

    Oh, and I'm glad you're still with us and hope you recover swiftly.
    Ta. I’m not going quietly, if I go
    ATB. This is very you.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frAEmhqdLFs
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    For wider reading:
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/09/millennials-snp-sunday-trading-laws-problem-independence
  • 10% swing to Labour

    @bigjohnowls please explain :lol:
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,775

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
    Yes. Points 2-4 are fine, but that first one is pure nonsense.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    edited December 2021

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    It’s a strategy for Lab-sympathetic SNP voters in seats where Labour can win either through an SNP > Labour swing or a SNP + LD > Labour swing.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625

    Dura_Ace said:

    MrEd said:

    So it is likely those voters will come out and vote - not because they love BJ but because their view on anyone non-Labour is that they will favour minority groups over the WWC.

    The WWC do things like this:



    They should be the least favoured group in the country.

    After the voting of 2rd December
    The Secretary of the Writers' Union
    Had leaflets distributed on the Regents Canal Walk
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the commentariat
    And could only win it back
    By increased Ken Loach film watching quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler
    for the commentariat
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?
    Nice hat-tip to the Regent’s Canal, which I live three minutes from, run down every second day, and on which I once encountered a puffing Boris Johnson.
    Drink in the Narrowboat or the Essex?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,092
    Did you see No.2 bus leave the road and end up in a field on Wednesday afternoon?

    https://onthewight.com/did-you-see-no-2-bus-leave-the-road-and-end-up-in-a-field-on-wednesday-afternoon/
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812
    The problem is, the SNP is “soft on Boris”* and Stuart doesn’t like it.

    *As much remarked, Sturgeon and Boris have a symbiotic relationship of convenience.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772

    10% swing to Labour

    @bigjohnowls please explain :lol:

    The average swing to Labour in by-elections this Parliament is now 0.4%. This is not currently an election-winning performance.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625
    Farooq said:

    algarkirk said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    This cat breast-feeding thing has got me thinking about how weird it is that humans drink cow's and sheep's milk.

    Well, that is weird, because we had to evolve the ability to digest it.

    The crucial point in the story about the "breastfed cat" is that the cat didn't want to latch on and was distressed about the way it was swaddled. I don't know what the story is with the cat owner, but if it were in the UK I imagine the RSPCA would now be involved.
    Ok, I didn't read the article. But still, the idea of inter-species suckling is suddenly hurting my brain.
    And now I'm seeing it everywhere! Romulus and Remus. Tori Amos.
    For some reason ice cream made from human milk is seen as more weird than ice cream made from cattle milk.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011
    It's the dessert of choice among the trend conscious under 10 months old in the soft south. Up here it's ice cream from fox milk mixed with grit and jackdaw liver for the babies.

    Aye, in posh parts o' North. Some of us couldn' afford jackdaw liver mind.
    You had grit?!?

    {opens bottle of Chateau de Chassilier}

    Riiiiiiiiiiiiight....
  • MattW said:

    IanB2 said:

    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands

    " drank to the point of drunkenness"

    Scientific definition, dat.
    Exactly. Voodoo survey par excellence.
  • Farooq said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    For wider reading:
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/09/millennials-snp-sunday-trading-laws-problem-independence
    Yes they voted on a law that didn't apply to Scotland on the basis of "consequences".

    That's not how jurisdiction works. Brexit had consequences in France and Ireland but that doesn't give them a vote.

    As said, if Scotland were to be independent plenty of laws Westminster passes would have consequences in Scotland but they wouldn't get a vote.
  • algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    It’s a strategy for Lab-sympathetic SNP voters in seats where Labour can win either through an SNP > Labour swing or a SNP + LD > Labour swing.
    Wishful thinking never won a parliamentary seat.
  • MattW said:

    IanB2 said:

    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands

    " drank to the point of drunkenness"

    Scientific definition, dat.
    I'm sure they were more precise with the actual question; "But were you shit-faced?"
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094
    edited December 2021
    The BBC has an omicron how-to-say guide.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59489988

    Which finishes with "in the UK it is pronounced with a short O, ohmicron".

    FFS, the BBC does not even know that a short O is like orange. A long O is like Owe.

    Does no one teach these goons Latin?

    Why are the Beeboids getting their pronunciation from a blooming *archaeologist*?
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    Dura_Ace said:

    MrEd said:

    So it is likely those voters will come out and vote - not because they love BJ but because their view on anyone non-Labour is that they will favour minority groups over the WWC.

    The WWC do things like this:



    They should be the least favoured group in the country.

    After the voting of 2rd December
    The Secretary of the Writers' Union
    Had leaflets distributed on the Regents Canal Walk
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the commentariat
    And could only win it back
    By increased Ken Loach film watching quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler
    for the commentariat
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?
    Nice hat-tip to the Regent’s Canal, which I live three minutes from, run down every second day, and on which I once encountered a puffing Boris Johnson.
    Drink in the Narrowboat or the Essex?
    Is that an offer? Sure. 😃
    I normally drink in London Fields, or perhaps the Scolt Head in De Beauvoir. Or the Island Queen, closer to Islington.

    Gonna miss this sorely in NYC!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625

    Dura_Ace said:

    MrEd said:

    So it is likely those voters will come out and vote - not because they love BJ but because their view on anyone non-Labour is that they will favour minority groups over the WWC.

    The WWC do things like this:



    They should be the least favoured group in the country.

    After the voting of 2rd December
    The Secretary of the Writers' Union
    Had leaflets distributed on the Regents Canal Walk
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the commentariat
    And could only win it back
    By increased Ken Loach film watching quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler
    for the commentariat
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?
    Nice hat-tip to the Regent’s Canal, which I live three minutes from, run down every second day, and on which I once encountered a puffing Boris Johnson.
    Drink in the Narrowboat or the Essex?
    Is that an offer? Sure. 😃
    I normally drink in London Fields, or perhaps the Scolt Head in De Beauvoir. Or the Island Queen, closer to Islington.

    Gonna miss this sorely in NYC!
    Island Queen used to be good - then seemed to change hands a lot.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    It’s a strategy for Lab-sympathetic SNP voters in seats where Labour can win either through an SNP > Labour swing or a SNP + LD > Labour swing.
    Wishful thinking never won a parliamentary seat.
    I don’t think it’s wishful.

    Your yourself have grudgingly praised Anas, and targeting seats beats a general waiting for Scotland to “come home” which seems to have been Labour’s former strategy.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,812

    Dura_Ace said:

    MrEd said:

    So it is likely those voters will come out and vote - not because they love BJ but because their view on anyone non-Labour is that they will favour minority groups over the WWC.

    The WWC do things like this:



    They should be the least favoured group in the country.

    After the voting of 2rd December
    The Secretary of the Writers' Union
    Had leaflets distributed on the Regents Canal Walk
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the commentariat
    And could only win it back
    By increased Ken Loach film watching quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler
    for the commentariat
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?
    Nice hat-tip to the Regent’s Canal, which I live three minutes from, run down every second day, and on which I once encountered a puffing Boris Johnson.
    Drink in the Narrowboat or the Essex?
    Is that an offer? Sure. 😃
    I normally drink in London Fields, or perhaps the Scolt Head in De Beauvoir. Or the Island Queen, closer to Islington.

    Gonna miss this sorely in NYC!
    Island Queen used to be good - then seemed to change hands a lot.
    Covid surely hasn’t helped.
    Was a good place on a late summer evening.
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    To protect the pay of retail workers in Scotland. Scottish shop staff currently got a premium for working on a Sunday but the SNP - and unions like Usdaw - believed that an extension to Sunday shopping hours in England and Wales would increase the likelihood that retailers would pay just single time for staff across the whole of the UK.

    We only vote on English affairs where there is a clear Scottish interest. I suppose Starmer could add Scottish sweeteners to all English legislation?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 18,094

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    SNP confused with Scotland Klaxon :smile:
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,584
    IanB2 said:

    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands

    All we can deduce from that is that they are the most honest drinkers.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,153

    The problem is, the SNP is “soft on Boris”* and Stuart doesn’t like it.

    *As much remarked, Sturgeon and Boris have a symbiotic relationship of convenience.

    Eh??

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19758572.mps-can-call-boris-johnson-liar-commons-narrow-context/
  • algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    It’s a strategy for Lab-sympathetic SNP voters in seats where Labour can win either through an SNP > Labour swing or a SNP + LD > Labour swing.
    Wishful thinking never won a parliamentary seat.
    I don’t think it’s wishful.

    Your yourself have grudgingly praised Anas, and targeting seats beats a general waiting for Scotland to “come home” which seems to have been Labour’s former strategy.
    Scottish voters consider the modern iteration of the Labour Party to be “home”? Well, it’s a theory.
  • 10% swing to Labour

    @bigjohnowls please explain :lol:

    The average swing to Labour in by-elections this Parliament is now 0.4%. This is not currently an election-winning performance.
    But a 10% swing replicated nationally wouldn't be too shabby!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,584
    Pulpstar said:

    Feeling a bit better today, was in bed by 8 last night. Booster is defo a bigger effect than the original jabs.

    Not for me.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,153
    MattW said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    SNP confused with Scotland Klaxon :smile:
    No, he's quite right. It was - IIRC - the Unionist MPs for Scottish seats who used to vote on English-only matters as I recall - though some Tories did recuse themselves, quite properly. The most infamous example was LDs voting through the student funding changes.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,584
    Farooq said:

    algarkirk said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    This cat breast-feeding thing has got me thinking about how weird it is that humans drink cow's and sheep's milk.

    Well, that is weird, because we had to evolve the ability to digest it.

    The crucial point in the story about the "breastfed cat" is that the cat didn't want to latch on and was distressed about the way it was swaddled. I don't know what the story is with the cat owner, but if it were in the UK I imagine the RSPCA would now be involved.
    Ok, I didn't read the article. But still, the idea of inter-species suckling is suddenly hurting my brain.
    And now I'm seeing it everywhere! Romulus and Remus. Tori Amos.
    For some reason ice cream made from human milk is seen as more weird than ice cream made from cattle milk.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011
    It's the dessert of choice among the trend conscious under 10 months old in the soft south. Up here it's ice cream from fox milk mixed with grit and jackdaw liver for the babies.

    Aye, in posh parts o' North. Some of us couldn' afford jackdaw liver mind.
    You could always stone the crows.
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    To protect the pay of retail workers in Scotland. Scottish shop staff currently got a premium for working on a Sunday but the SNP - and unions like Usdaw - believed that an extension to Sunday shopping hours in England and Wales would increase the likelihood that retailers would pay just single time for staff across the whole of the UK.

    We only vote on English affairs where there is a clear Scottish interest. I suppose Starmer could add Scottish sweeteners to all English legislation?
    But the law didn't apply to Scottish staff.

    A change in Irish or Welsh or English or French laws could affect Scottish workers but that doesn't mean that applies to Scotland. American law changes, Chinese law changes can affect us here in the UK too.

    If Scotland is independent then that means no say in any English laws, whether they have consequences in Scotland or not.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 43,625
    Nigelb said:

    IanB2 said:

    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands

    All we can deduce from that is that they are the most honest drinkers.
    No, all we can deduce from that is that they are the drinkers who *say* they drink the most.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    It’s a strategy for Lab-sympathetic SNP voters in seats where Labour can win either through an SNP > Labour swing or a SNP + LD > Labour swing.
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    The SNP won't support a Tory Gov't - certainly Sturgeon's SNP won't. You can "defeat Boris" by either voting Labour or SNP.
  • Nigelb said:

    IanB2 said:

    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands

    All we can deduce from that is that they are the most honest drinkers.
    No, all we can deduce from that is that they are the drinkers who *say* they drink the most.
    Less than once a fortnight on average?

    Not a very high average for anyone.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950

    MaxPB said:

    The Lancet paper looks great for AZ primed people! Especially under 70s who got the Moderna booster, massive uplift in t-cell response and antibodies.

    Going to check the NHS website a lot this evening as I suspect they'll make the backend changes before the weekend and announce it in a press conference Monday evening. I'm informed that 30+ will become eligible before Xmas but not by a lot. 18+ will be waiting until early January.

    That's fantastic news and reinforces that we should get our jabs but nothing else, life must go on.

    Though I would be in favour of a Covid Tax on anyone unvaccinated, just as there's tobacco duty on smokers. 2% extra on income tax, that is zero-rated if you've had your vaccine.
    What about a tax on three day eventers, mountaineers, jockeys, Sunday League footballers, parkour-ers, rock climbers, scaffolders, window cleaners, roofers, farmers, etc.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,584

    10% swing to Labour

    @bigjohnowls please explain :lol:

    The average swing to Labour in by-elections this Parliament is now 0.4%. This is not currently an election-winning performance.
    Improving trend, though.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,153
    Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    It’s a strategy for Lab-sympathetic SNP voters in seats where Labour can win either through an SNP > Labour swing or a SNP + LD > Labour swing.
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    The SNP won't support a Tory Gov't - certainly Sturgeon's SNP won't. You can "defeat Boris" by either voting Labour or SNP.
    Quite. And voting Labour or indeed LD when they are third place after the Tory is an irrational strategy.
  • I correctly predicted Labour would get 31% but the turnout was a complete damp squib.

    I think the Tories might have serious turnout problems at the next election under any leader even though not many of their voters are not necessarily switching to other parties.

    Still I suppose it's good that reform flopped as there will be no avenue for the Tories to try and reinvent themselves like they did in 2019.
  • TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    The Lancet paper looks great for AZ primed people! Especially under 70s who got the Moderna booster, massive uplift in t-cell response and antibodies.

    Going to check the NHS website a lot this evening as I suspect they'll make the backend changes before the weekend and announce it in a press conference Monday evening. I'm informed that 30+ will become eligible before Xmas but not by a lot. 18+ will be waiting until early January.

    That's fantastic news and reinforces that we should get our jabs but nothing else, life must go on.

    Though I would be in favour of a Covid Tax on anyone unvaccinated, just as there's tobacco duty on smokers. 2% extra on income tax, that is zero-rated if you've had your vaccine.
    What about a tax on three day eventers, mountaineers, jockeys, Sunday League footballers, parkour-ers, rock climbers, scaffolders, window cleaners, roofers, farmers, etc.
    How much of an impact are they putting on the NHS?

    Is Covid closer to smokers or footballers when it comes to impact?

    Do you find tobacco duty unconscionable?
  • TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    The Lancet paper looks great for AZ primed people! Especially under 70s who got the Moderna booster, massive uplift in t-cell response and antibodies.

    Going to check the NHS website a lot this evening as I suspect they'll make the backend changes before the weekend and announce it in a press conference Monday evening. I'm informed that 30+ will become eligible before Xmas but not by a lot. 18+ will be waiting until early January.

    That's fantastic news and reinforces that we should get our jabs but nothing else, life must go on.

    Though I would be in favour of a Covid Tax on anyone unvaccinated, just as there's tobacco duty on smokers. 2% extra on income tax, that is zero-rated if you've had your vaccine.
    What about a tax on three day eventers, mountaineers, jockeys, Sunday League footballers, parkour-ers, rock climbers, scaffolders, window cleaners, roofers, farmers, etc.
    I haven't heard the NHS whining that the hospitals are filling up with such people causing the treatment for others are being cancelled.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    10% swing to Labour

    @bigjohnowls please explain :lol:

    The average swing to Labour in by-elections this Parliament is now 0.4%. This is not currently an election-winning performance.
    That is realistic. There is a lot of work for Labour to do.

    I think the LibDems may well take North Shropshire. The recent by-election it most reminds me of is Brecon & Radnor. Even though a rural Leaver seat, the LibDems still took it.

    Having looked through who is standing, the most remarkable thing is the Monster Raving Loony candidate is clearly very sane compared to some of the other candidates.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-59289032
  • algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.

    Looks like I got Old Bexley and Sidcup spot on so let me try for North Shropshire.

    Con 48%
    Libs 42%
    Lab 2%
    Green 3%
    Others 5%

    Turnout 43%
    - “ publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland”

    Huh? Which seven?

    Edinburgh South HOLD is the obvious list candidate, but thereafter?

    East Lothian Coast
    Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    … but then it gets harder…

    Coatbridge and Bellshill?
    Glasgow Central?
    Midlothian?

    … then it gets super hard…

    Airdrie and Shotts??
    Rutherglen??
    Yes, all of those.
    In a way, it doesn’t matter if they win them or not. The message is:

    1. SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting
    2. Unionists should vote Labour in some seats
    3. Labour knows Scotland is decisive
    4. Labour is not soft on the SNP.

    To win a progressive majority that can form a government; Keir needs several strategies, as a general swing won’t do it.

    This is part of a Scottish strategy.
    So, you think that Labour strategy ought to include the message that “SNP voters can defeat Boris via tactical voting”? Pray tell, in which seats are the SLab candidates in 2nd place behind the sitting SCon MPs?
    Some SNP voters would prefer to defeat Boris than to re-elect an SNP MP.

    It’s a strategy for Lab-sympathetic SNP voters in seats where Labour can win either through an SNP > Labour swing or a SNP + LD > Labour swing.
    Wishful thinking never won a parliamentary seat.
    I don’t think it’s wishful.

    Your yourself have grudgingly praised Anas, and targeting seats beats a general waiting for Scotland to “come home” which seems to have been Labour’s former strategy.
    I’m not sure I “praised” Anas. I said he was better than Lamont, Leonard, Gray, Murphy, Dugdale etc. Unless you count damning with faint praise as “praise”?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,343
    edited December 2021
    Carnyx said:

    The problem is, the SNP is “soft on Boris”* and Stuart doesn’t like it.

    *As much remarked, Sturgeon and Boris have a symbiotic relationship of convenience.

    Eh??

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/19758572.mps-can-call-boris-johnson-liar-commons-narrow-context/
    Sturgeon keeps Boris from losing to a Labour majority, and makes it harder for Labour to lead an alliance government; Boris keeps Sturgeon in a job right in the spotlight without NS having to be the PM of a bankrupt failed state with a customs border at Gretna and Berwick, without FOM for goods between Scotland and England.

    The history of PB suggests that other views on this are, while wholly erroneous, available in industrial and often scatalogical quantities.

  • Good morning

    I am sure the conservatives will be relieved to have won OBS and despite the wilder claims of the Labour spokesperson this morning they must be disappointed they did not get closer

    For all @HYUFD enthusiasm for Reform UK they do look an irrelevance, and rejoin the EU with 0.69 does seem a lost cause

    North Shropshire on the 16th must be a very likely Lib Dem gain, especially when considering their excellent performance in the locals last night, and then it is Christmas

    The conservatives, and Boris in particular, need to use this holiday period to reflect on just how poor they have been since the wholly avoidable Paterson debacle and get their act together

    The Lib Dems should go into this period with a renewed confidence and optimism as again they become the benefactor of the nations protest votes, and Labour need to ask themselves why
  • Can anyone explain why so many in the NHS haven't had their booster dose ?

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/covid-19-vaccinations-
    archive/
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Nigelb said:

    10% swing to Labour

    @bigjohnowls please explain :lol:

    The average swing to Labour in by-elections this Parliament is now 0.4%. This is not currently an election-winning performance.
    Improving trend, though.
    Yes. Not thrilling at Bexley but I dispute the 'flop' description in the header.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,092
    Mail: Boris Johnson and the Tories were given a bloody nose in the Conservative safe seat contest after their majority was slashed from almost 19,000 to less than 4,500.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,584

    Nigelb said:

    IanB2 said:

    In other news....

    Australians have been named the heaviest drinkers in the world after spending more time drunk in 2020 than any other nation.

    An international survey has found Australians drank to the point of drunkenness an average of 27 times a year, almost double the global average of 15. Almost a quarter of Australians reported feeling regret for becoming intoxicated. The Global Drug Survey asked more than 32,000 people from 22 countries what their drug and alcohol consumption was last year.

    On average, Australians drank alcohol in line with the global average of two nights a week, and became heavily drunk about once every two weeks. The French topped that metric, drinking around three times a week.

    Frequency of being drunk – top 10 countries
    1 Australia
    2 Denmark
    3 Finland
    4 US
    5 UK
    6 Canada
    7 Ireland
    8 France
    9 Sweden
    10 Netherlands

    All we can deduce from that is that they are the most honest drinkers.
    No, all we can deduce from that is that they are the drinkers who *say* they drink the most.
    Well they don't drink the most.
    https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/alcohol-consumption-by-country
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    The Lancet paper looks great for AZ primed people! Especially under 70s who got the Moderna booster, massive uplift in t-cell response and antibodies.

    Going to check the NHS website a lot this evening as I suspect they'll make the backend changes before the weekend and announce it in a press conference Monday evening. I'm informed that 30+ will become eligible before Xmas but not by a lot. 18+ will be waiting until early January.

    That's fantastic news and reinforces that we should get our jabs but nothing else, life must go on.

    Though I would be in favour of a Covid Tax on anyone unvaccinated, just as there's tobacco duty on smokers. 2% extra on income tax, that is zero-rated if you've had your vaccine.
    What about a tax on three day eventers, mountaineers, jockeys, Sunday League footballers, parkour-ers, rock climbers, scaffolders, window cleaners, roofers, farmers, etc.
    I'm personally opposed, but you can make your case.

    The principle is already established, though. We tax tobacco, sugar and alcohol on the basis of the social and health harms that they cause.

    There's no great fundamental point of principle against taxing the choice to refuse the Covid vaccine, with the health consequences that has - provided the tax is not set at a level that is impossible to pay, with an implication of imprisonment for non-payment.
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    To protect the pay of retail workers in Scotland. Scottish shop staff currently got a premium for working on a Sunday but the SNP - and unions like Usdaw - believed that an extension to Sunday shopping hours in England and Wales would increase the likelihood that retailers would pay just single time for staff across the whole of the UK.

    We only vote on English affairs where there is a clear Scottish interest. I suppose Starmer could add Scottish sweeteners to all English legislation?
    But the law didn't apply to Scottish staff.

    A change in Irish or Welsh or English or French laws could affect Scottish workers but that doesn't mean that applies to Scotland. American law changes, Chinese law changes can affect us here in the UK too.

    If Scotland is independent then that means no say in any English laws, whether they have consequences in Scotland or not.
    I’m all in favour of Scottish legislators having zero say over English affairs. Independence will also be independence for England.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,153

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    To protect the pay of retail workers in Scotland. Scottish shop staff currently got a premium for working on a Sunday but the SNP - and unions like Usdaw - believed that an extension to Sunday shopping hours in England and Wales would increase the likelihood that retailers would pay just single time for staff across the whole of the UK.

    We only vote on English affairs where there is a clear Scottish interest. I suppose Starmer could add Scottish sweeteners to all English legislation?
    But the law didn't apply to Scottish staff.

    A change in Irish or Welsh or English or French laws could affect Scottish workers but that doesn't mean that applies to Scotland. American law changes, Chinese law changes can affect us here in the UK too.

    If Scotland is independent then that means no say in any English laws, whether they have consequences in Scotland or not.
    I’m all in favour of Scottish legislators having zero say over English affairs. Independence will also be independence for England.
    It's very odd that the Tories under Johnson cancelled EVEL. Almost as if they wanted to concoct a grievance against SKS if he falls into that trap.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,092
    Last night's QT with the vaccines minister petrified to depart from the 'authorised' words about last year's illegal Tory Xmas Party, amid some audience hilarity, is an amusing watch,
  • TOPPING said:

    MaxPB said:

    The Lancet paper looks great for AZ primed people! Especially under 70s who got the Moderna booster, massive uplift in t-cell response and antibodies.

    Going to check the NHS website a lot this evening as I suspect they'll make the backend changes before the weekend and announce it in a press conference Monday evening. I'm informed that 30+ will become eligible before Xmas but not by a lot. 18+ will be waiting until early January.

    That's fantastic news and reinforces that we should get our jabs but nothing else, life must go on.

    Though I would be in favour of a Covid Tax on anyone unvaccinated, just as there's tobacco duty on smokers. 2% extra on income tax, that is zero-rated if you've had your vaccine.
    What about a tax on three day eventers, mountaineers, jockeys, Sunday League footballers, parkour-ers, rock climbers, scaffolders, window cleaners, roofers, farmers, etc.
    I'm personally opposed, but you can make your case.

    The principle is already established, though. We tax tobacco, sugar and alcohol on the basis of the social and health harms that they cause.

    There's no great fundamental point of principle against taxing the choice to refuse the Covid vaccine, with the health consequences that has - provided the tax is not set at a level that is impossible to pay, with an implication of imprisonment for non-payment.
    Indeed. Lockdown is a restriction of civil liberties, paying taxes is annoying but it isn't.

    The NHS needs to be funded by taxation and if people go out of their way to increase the burden on the NHS its only fair they pay the taxes to represent their burden.

    Why should I be taxed even more or lose my liberties to fund smokers or the unvaccinated?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,584
    edited December 2021
    Good article on possible Russian intentions towards Ukraine.
    https://newlinesmag.com/reportage/will-putin-invade-ukraine-again/

    Includes an extended passage on what a proven, barefaced and consistent liar Putin is.
    Deliberative, rather than random use of dishonesty (as in the case of, for example, Boris).
  • Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    To protect the pay of retail workers in Scotland. Scottish shop staff currently got a premium for working on a Sunday but the SNP - and unions like Usdaw - believed that an extension to Sunday shopping hours in England and Wales would increase the likelihood that retailers would pay just single time for staff across the whole of the UK.

    We only vote on English affairs where there is a clear Scottish interest. I suppose Starmer could add Scottish sweeteners to all English legislation?
    But the law didn't apply to Scottish staff.

    A change in Irish or Welsh or English or French laws could affect Scottish workers but that doesn't mean that applies to Scotland. American law changes, Chinese law changes can affect us here in the UK too.

    If Scotland is independent then that means no say in any English laws, whether they have consequences in Scotland or not.
    I’m all in favour of Scottish legislators having zero say over English affairs. Independence will also be independence for England.
    It's very odd that the Tories under Johnson cancelled EVEL. Almost as if they wanted to concoct a grievance against SKS if he falls into that trap.
    EVEL was a bad joke that didn't work.

    Sunday trading and the SNP rejecting it proved that.
  • Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    To protect the pay of retail workers in Scotland. Scottish shop staff currently got a premium for working on a Sunday but the SNP - and unions like Usdaw - believed that an extension to Sunday shopping hours in England and Wales would increase the likelihood that retailers would pay just single time for staff across the whole of the UK.

    We only vote on English affairs where there is a clear Scottish interest. I suppose Starmer could add Scottish sweeteners to all English legislation?
    But the law didn't apply to Scottish staff.

    A change in Irish or Welsh or English or French laws could affect Scottish workers but that doesn't mean that applies to Scotland. American law changes, Chinese law changes can affect us here in the UK too.

    If Scotland is independent then that means no say in any English laws, whether they have consequences in Scotland or not.
    I’m all in favour of Scottish legislators having zero say over English affairs. Independence will also be independence for England.
    It's very odd that the Tories under Johnson cancelled EVEL. Almost as if they wanted to concoct a grievance against SKS if he falls into that trap.
    You just answered your own question.
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    eek said:

    Well I got the Green and LD figures spot on at 4% and 3% respectively, and the fact the Greens would be ahead of the LDs.

    But other than that, mine wasn't a very good prediction. Seriously overestimated the traction both Labour and Refuk would get and underestimated the Tory share.

    Refuk are truly a dead duck joke of a party. Couldn't get a much more sympathetic seat, with their 'leader' running, in a by-election where the voters can give the government a risk free kicking and this is the paltry amount they get? They're not going to even feature remotely at a General Election.

    Got to say that it's a good night for the Tories, Boris is currently keeping all the Leave voters onside.
    Broadly agree. But SKS's strategy can be misleading. Obviously his approach - attack the Tories, try to avoid unforced errors, give no hostages by having policies - cannot win (326+ seats) an election; but much less is required to decapitate the Tories. Labour can't win an extra 125 seats, but Lab, LD, SNP and Green can fairly easily win the 55 or so required make a Tory government impossible.

    Lots of people are missing the fact that this is the SKS strategy. He is absolutely on track to have a 40%+ chance of success.

    ATM his biggest problem - "vote Labour, get SNP running the country" - is one he can ignore while consolidating his position. As long as he can pretend his objective is 326 seats he does not have to address it.

    If the LDs do well in NS then without winning either seat the non-Tory alliance will have had a good month.

    Agree this is his strategy, but he’ll have to address the SNP somehow. I suggested a month or so ago that he publicly target a “magnificent 7” set of seats of Scotland as to demonstrate that Scotland is central to his playbook and that he is not soft on the SNP.
    I'm not sure that will help him in an election campaign - if a hung parliament looks at all possible, the "in Sturgeon's pocket" posters will come out again.
    At the cost of damaging the Union even more. "Unionists [sic] refuse to let legitimately elected MPs for Scottish constituencies take part fully in Westminster."
    I don't see how that follows.
    Tory propaganda portraying it as illegitimate for SNP to be involved in a coalition government or c&s. Will not go down well in Scotland.
    If England had its own parliament like Scotland then the SNP giving Labour confidence and supply in a hung parliament would be less of an issue in England.

    As it is, Starmer would demand the SNP make him PM and vote on English domestic legislation to give him a working majority in return for him giving the SNP devomax and indyref2
    IF England had its own parliament then the Tories would still revel in Jock—bashing.

    SNPs abstain on England-only legislation. That ain’t going to change. If Starmer wants to change English legislation then he needs to win in England. No shortcuts.
    The SNP voted on England-only Sunday Trading law changes.
    To protect the pay of retail workers in Scotland. Scottish shop staff currently got a premium for working on a Sunday but the SNP - and unions like Usdaw - believed that an extension to Sunday shopping hours in England and Wales would increase the likelihood that retailers would pay just single time for staff across the whole of the UK.

    We only vote on English affairs where there is a clear Scottish interest. I suppose Starmer could add Scottish sweeteners to all English legislation?
    But the law didn't apply to Scottish staff.

    A change in Irish or Welsh or English or French laws could affect Scottish workers but that doesn't mean that applies to Scotland. American law changes, Chinese law changes can affect us here in the UK too.

    If Scotland is independent then that means no say in any English laws, whether they have consequences in Scotland or not.
    I’m all in favour of Scottish legislators having zero say over English affairs. Independence will also be independence for England.
    On that we're agreed, but lets not pretend we're already there or that the SNP act as if they are.

    The SNP are prepared to vote on English-only matters as they've already demonstrated. They're partisan shills in Westminster just as all the other parties are.

    Only independence will change that.
  • 10% swing to Labour

    @bigjohnowls please explain :lol:

    The average swing to Labour in by-elections this Parliament is now 0.4%. This is not currently an election-winning performance.
    That is realistic. There is a lot of work for Labour to do.

    I think the LibDems may well take North Shropshire. The recent by-election it most reminds me of is Brecon & Radnor. Even though a rural Leaver seat, the LibDems still took it.

    Having looked through who is standing, the most remarkable thing is the Monster Raving Loony candidate is clearly very sane compared to some of the other candidates.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-59289032
    Ah it is a sad symptom of our age. Gone are the days of proper loonies promoting such wild policies as the compulsory serving of asparagus at breakfast, free corsets for the under-fives and the abolition of slavery.
This discussion has been closed.