Howdy, Stranger!

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

Starmer has better than a 13.9% chance of being next PM – politicalbetting.com

2456789

Comments

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,782
    Selebian said:

    Having been too lazy busy to dig into the actual documents myself, I've been going on the comments from you two.

    1. Nigel provides strong evidence on low false positives (1-0 to Nigel)
    2. Bart pops in a cheaky one straight from the restart with the quote about supervision (1-1?)
    3. Nigel repeats that they are community tests. VAR disallows goal. (1-0)
    4. Bart brought down in area with slightly different quote on ATSs. Ref points to spot, I think. Not sure.

    I would note that my Uni had one of the first ATSs, internally run, not NHS as such. Supervsion there extended to being given the test, asked if you knew what you were doing and that was it. Nowadays, you just get given the test.

    I might have to go off and read the study myself if you two don't sort this out!

    Given we were originally talking about Liverpool, you'd think they would be doing supervised tests as part of the training regime etc, not just relying on players doing it themselves? So self-test cockup, if a possible source of false positives (which is not itself conclusive) seems unlikely in that case.
    Such a high rate in a single setting could be cross contamination (there were those who were infected), or a seriously duff batch of tests.
    Note we've seen similar clusters of false results for PCR with the lab error.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,834
    dixiedean said:

    You are the ghost of Brucie and I claim my jackpot!
    Good game.
    We won't really get a clear picture for another week or so - data still fuzzed by bank holiday effects and atypical patterns of behaviour at Christmas/New Year.

    But I'm guessing lower.
  • Nigelb said:

    Except that the figures for confirmatory PCR tests for self administered LFTs have been published regularly, and remain entirely consistent with that figure.
    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043471/rapid-testing-16-december-2021.pdf
    That doesn't remain consistent. You're original link which included 24k cases (1.7m is misleading since its including all the negatives too) had confirmatory PCR positives at 93.7%: 1,700,972 were conducted and 38,270 (2.2%) LFDs returned a positive result. Among positive LFD results, 25,779 (67%) were matched to a PCR test within the subsequent 5 days. Of those, 24,147 (93.7%) returned a positive PCR result

    Your second link says "For self-reported LFD positives that were matched to a confirmatory PCR, 87% were confirmed positive by a subsequent PCR test"

    So link one is 94% (rounded) and link 2 is 87%. I can see the difference between those numbers, can't you?

    Would 87% really match with 1/1000 sensitivity when that was based on 93.7% not 87%?
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,266
    Pulpstar said:

    LFTs and PCR user test error is the same these days, I thought you'd get some NHS bod sticking a swab up your nose but the instructions and PCR test kit are just given for you to do whilst you park up.
    Yep, but for LFT there is also the do test at home option, which might include opening the thing, forgetting whether you put it in your nose or not, accidentally swapping your swab or test strip or solution with your partner's (who, being a bit drunk and incapable of reading instructions carefully swabbed armpit for five minutes), not noticing that your eldest son snorted the solution and replaced it with urine and the aforementioned red-pen tampering problem :wink:

    I'm willing to believe that the more focused process of going somewhere specifically to do the test could change the number of positives and negatives a little. Although I'd still err towards it increasing sensitivity rather than specificity, if anything.
  • A majority of UK voters voted for Progressive Parties in 2019. Fact.
    Yes, over 90%.

    This government has allowed HIV-positive people to join the armed services.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,680
    FPT:

    Not according to financial press now, who are saying it likely to be short term spike. Political betting wise we can’t factor in its certain to be a huge poll plunging credit crunch.
    Choose the correct energy price mitigation package, and it will have quite the effect on inflation.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,550
    edited January 2022
    2 days after novax positive test....

    And on 18 December, Djokovic posed maskless during a photoshoot for the French newspaper Équipe. The paper says he wore a face mask during an interview but removed it for the photoshoot

    The way he carried on you would think he didn't have covid....
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,266
    Nigelb said:

    Prep for the war between the states ?
    To intimidate the Novaks/Novax army
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,782

    That doesn't remain consistent. You're original link which included 24k cases (1.7m is misleading since its including all the negatives too) had confirmatory PCR positives at 93.7%: 1,700,972 were conducted and 38,270 (2.2%) LFDs returned a positive result. Among positive LFD results, 25,779 (67%) were matched to a PCR test within the subsequent 5 days. Of those, 24,147 (93.7%) returned a positive PCR result

    Your second link says "For self-reported LFD positives that were matched to a confirmatory PCR, 87% were confirmed positive by a subsequent PCR test"

    So link one is 94% (rounded) and link 2 is 87%. I can see the difference between those numbers, can't you?

    Would 87% really match with 1/1000 sensitivity when that was based on 93.7% not 87%?
    Specificity.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,818
    Endillion said:

    So, we should probably give him the benefit of the doubt that he meant the simple explanation in which his maths works, rather than the slightly more complicated version in which they don't?
    The alternative is I'm the sort of fluffy type who doesn't understand conditional probabilities.

    C'mon. :smile:
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,333
    edited January 2022
    MattW said:

    What's the expected lifetime of these? (Assuming they don't get blown up). 25 years?

    The Australians don't fuck around with clapped out gear and generally upgrade relatively quickly. Their M1A1s which are being replaced were only bought in the mid noughties so their A2s will be around for 15-20 years.

    Meanwhile the British army hasn't managed to procure a new armoured vehicle for 35 years.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    alex_ said:

    Like all these discussions I tend to thing these sorts of claims are a bit exaggerated. Often said by people who also complain about the power of the BBC, right wing press barons etc etc
    Fading Ratings: How far broadcast tv has tumbled since 2015

    - Viewership metrics for the 18-49 demo show tremendous declines in live and same-day viewing for primetime fall shows

    - Scripted content has seen the biggest drops as consumption patterns change

    - There are just 10 shows or special events with an average 18-49 demo rating greater than 1.0 in 2021, versus 77 in 2015

    https://variety.com/vip/fading-ratings-how-far-broadcast-tv-has-tumbled-since-2015-1235124641/
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,786
    My comment got lost at the end of the previous thread:

    On the opinion polls, it may well be that the Tories recover and sail to victory at the next GE.

    But what's interesting is the change of mood on PB. It's not so long ago that virtually everybody (right, centre, and left) thought that a Tory GE victory in 2024 or whenever was a slam dunk. The accepted view was that Starmer was hopeless, the Shadow Cabinet crap, and Labour moribund. Whereas Boris, to coin a phrase, had his finger on the metaphorical clitoris of enough of the British people to get away with anything and serve at least two terms.

    How that has changed. Many, if not most, posters seem to think a Labour minority government is reasonably likely, and even a handful think an outright Labour win is not inconceivable. Even HYUFD has been hinting that the Tories are unlikely to be in power next time around. The mood music has certainly changed, hasn't it?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Dura_Ace said:

    The Australians don't fuck around with clapped out gear and generally upgrade relatively quickly. Their M1A1s which are being replaced were only bought in the mid noughties so their A2s will be around for 15-20 years.

    Meanwhile the British army hasn't managed to procure a new armoured vehicle for 35 years.
    FUDHY was hoping to hitch a lift on one of them during his long march on Edinburgh.
  • 2 days after novax positive test....

    And on 18 December, Djokovic posed maskless during a photoshoot for the French newspaper Équipe. The paper says he wore a face mask during an interview but removed it for the photoshoot

    The way he carried on you would think he didn't have covid....

    Or didn't care that he had Covid?

    Or didn't know that he had Covid.

    Is the testing date the date he took the test (sample date) or the date he was given the result. There's often a few days gap between the two.

    Didn't the Finnish PM go to a nightclub in similar circumstances not long ago? She said that she'd missed the text telling her to isolate so went to a nightclub until 4am instead.

    Some people have a life rather than just panic about Covid.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,236

    Does no-one in Australia own a map? With whom are they expecting to fight a *land* war?
    They have taken part in quite a few overseas conflicts.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_Australia

    The "Oh shit" factor when an MBT rumbles up has been noted by a number of people in the context of peace keeping missions etc.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    A really excellent thread from Mike. I think this is one of the best betting posts I've ever seen.

    Makes the bet on Starmer for next PM stunning value.
  • Or didn't care that he had Covid?

    Or didn't know that he had Covid.

    Is the testing date the date he took the test (sample date) or the date he was given the result. There's often a few days gap between the two.

    Didn't the Finnish PM go to a nightclub in similar circumstances not long ago? She said that she'd missed the text telling her to isolate so went to a nightclub until 4am instead.

    Some people have a life rather than just panic about Covid.
    Amazing timing....

    Documents sent to all players by Tennis Australia stated applications for medical exemptions must come ‘no later’ than December 10

    https://www.scmp.com/sport/tennis/article/3162670/australian-open-novak-djokovics-lawyers-cite-covid-19-positive-medical
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,570
    His twitter feed is about to explode....

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    3m
    When you bear in mind these figures, suddenly the fact that over 150k people died doesn't seem so bad - that might be only 1/10 of what might hv happened. It's actually pretty remarkable there were as few deaths as there have been. Frownie critics miss this crucial context.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,236
    MattW said:

    What's the expected lifetime of these? (Assuming they don't get blown up). 25 years?

    The Americans have a very active upgrade program* going on for their tanks. Partly Congressional pork to keep the tank factory busy.

    But it does mean that if you buy M1s they can be kept up to date with the latest threats etc for quite some years to come.

    *Think complete rebuild.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,550
    edited January 2022

    Or didn't care that he had Covid?

    Or didn't know that he had Covid.

    Is the testing date the date he took the test (sample date) or the date he was given the result. There's often a few days gap between the two.

    Didn't the Finnish PM go to a nightclub in similar circumstances not long ago? She said that she'd missed the text telling her to isolate so went to a nightclub until 4am instead.

    Some people have a life rather than just panic about Covid.
    BBC - The letter appears to say the test was returned seven hours after it was conducted.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    First Irish poll of 2022:

    SF 33% (+2)
    FG 23% (-2)
    FF 19% (+2)
    Lab 4% (nc)
    SD 4% (+1)
    Grn 3% (-1)
    PBP/S 3% (-1)
    Aon 2% (-1)
    oth 9% (nc)

    (9 January; +/- change on last Ireland Thinks/Irish Mail on Sunday poll 12 December)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,487
    Decided to put a little on Starmer at 7 (Ladbrokes, with boost).

    My best results are Sunak, Truss, Starmer, Hunt.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,113
    edited January 2022
    Endillion said:

    He's right. It would make absolutely no sense for Tory backbenchers to prop up a Starmer Government in England, while the SNP helped them pass UK-wide legislation. I would expect any Tory MP who volunteered to do so, to suffer the same fate as Grieve et al, immediately.
    Indeed, if Starmer fails to win a majority at the next general election, or at least fails to win most seats in a hung parliament, then he could still become PM even if the Tories have a majority in England still but he has a choice.

    1. Agree a deal with the SNP that requires indyref2 and devomax but means he cannot get England only legislation through.

    2. Agree a deal with the Conservatives that avoids indyref2 and means he can get England only legislation through but infuriates the left and the SNP.
  • HYUFD said:

    Even if they did that would mean that in effect there was a Labour-Conservative Grand Coalition in England even if a Labour-SNP agreement UK wide
    Sounds like a recipe for much strong and great stable.
  • BBC - The letter appears to say the test was returned seven hours after it was conducted.
    So quite possibly didn't care that he had Covid then, just as many other people globally don't. That's an issue for the authorities wherever he was living at the time to take up if they choose to do so. He wouldn't be the first person on the planet to ignore a positive test and continued to socialise.

    If it wasn't a legal requirement to isolate here, I wouldn't do so following a positive test. Hopefully it won't be soon.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,550
    edited January 2022

    His twitter feed is about to explode....

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    3m
    When you bear in mind these figures, suddenly the fact that over 150k people died doesn't seem so bad - that might be only 1/10 of what might hv happened. It's actually pretty remarkable there were as few deaths as there have been. Frownie critics miss this crucial context.

    Certain elements of twitter have been pushing the single quote by Witty early on that 20k was a good result as evidence UK has failed miserably. Many mistakes made, but nobody in Europe now has managed to keep covid / deaths to anywhere near that pro-rata rate.

    Swedish Witty made the right call early on in terms of stating this will go on for 2-3 years at least. Where he was wrong is he thought it would take that long for a vaccine.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,364

    So quite possibly didn't care that he had Covid then, just as many other people globally don't. That's an issue for the authorities wherever he was living at the time to take up if they choose to do so. He wouldn't be the first person on the planet to ignore a positive test and continued to socialise.

    If it wasn't a legal requirement to isolate here, I wouldn't do so following a positive test. Hopefully it won't be soon.
    Wasn't it a requirement to isolate there, too?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,818

    Expect Farage to fly in to stage an intervention any day now.
    We see him here ... We see him there ... He's so dedicated.
  • Selebian said:

    Thinking about how to score this in the end. I see a two possible outcomes:
    1. Nigel is wrong. Following argument, he sees this and admits it. Easy to score.
    2. Bart is wrong. Argument continues until heat death of the universe or Nigel getting bored with it.

    Difficulty here is picking the point at which we're past where 1 would surely have happened and therefore conclude 2.
    I'm finished discussing it for the day, I have stuff to do.

    But if there's an answer for why confirmatory results were 93.7% which is the source for the 1/1000 claim but confirmatory results now are only 87% then I'd be curious what it is.

    An increase of nearly 7% in the LFD results not being verified seems statistically significant to me. It doesn't seem plausible to wish it all away as PCR false negatives, since PCR false negatives were accounted for in the original evidence using a very different figure.
  • So quite possibly didn't care that he had Covid then, just as many other people globally don't. That's an issue for the authorities wherever he was living at the time to take up if they choose to do so. He wouldn't be the first person on the planet to ignore a positive test and continued to socialise.

    If it wasn't a legal requirement to isolate here, I wouldn't do so following a positive test. Hopefully it won't be soon.
    I believe rules were 14 day isolation in Serbia.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 23,432
    edited January 2022
    RobD said:

    Wasn't it a requirement to isolate there, too?
    That's for the authorities there to deal with, if they can be arsed.

    You really think its unusual or noteworthy that people haven't always isolated when instructed to do so?

    That seems blissfully naive.

    The Serbian authorities don't seem bothered by it either way.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,364

    That's for the authorities there to deal with, if they can be arsed.

    You really think its unusual or noteworthy that people haven't always isolated when instructed to do so?

    That seems blissfully naive.
    Hm, I don't think that's a majority position actually. I think most people would isolate if it was required by law.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    “England only legislation”?

    So, England does have a legislature. Contrary to the bollocks on these threads yesterday.
    Legislation that applies only to England, such as on Sunday trading, is not decided in an English legislature, as it doesn't exist.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,818
    Selebian said:

    Thinking about how to score this in the end. I see a two possible outcomes:
    1. Nigel is wrong. Following argument, he sees this and admits it. Easy to score.
    2. Bart is wrong. Argument continues until heat death of the universe or Nigel getting bored with it.

    Difficulty here is picking the point at which we're past where 1 would surely have happened and therefore conclude 2.
    Football manager doesn't square all the epidemiological niceties when having a moan about something adversely impacting his team.

    This is surely the real shocker here.
  • RobD said:

    Hm, I don't think that's a majority position actually. I think most people would isolate if it was required by law.
    Most might, but why does Novax need to be in the majority?

    He seems like someone who'd quite happily be in the minority.

    If the Serbian authorities want to take it up with him they can do, but it doesn't seem like they're bothered either.

    And now I really must go.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,113

    First Irish poll of 2022:

    SF 33% (+2)
    FG 23% (-2)
    FF 19% (+2)
    Lab 4% (nc)
    SD 4% (+1)
    Grn 3% (-1)
    PBP/S 3% (-1)
    Aon 2% (-1)
    oth 9% (nc)

    (9 January; +/- change on last Ireland Thinks/Irish Mail on Sunday poll 12 December)

    Or alternatively:

    SF opposition 33%
    FG/FF government 42%
  • First Irish poll of 2022:

    SF 33% (+2)
    FG 23% (-2)
    FF 19% (+2)
    Lab 4% (nc)
    SD 4% (+1)
    Grn 3% (-1)
    PBP/S 3% (-1)
    Aon 2% (-1)
    oth 9% (nc)

    (9 January; +/- change on last Ireland Thinks/Irish Mail on Sunday poll 12 December)

    Strange to remember that Labour led a few polls 12 years ago. Presumably many of those voters have decamped en masse to SF?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,364

    Most might, but why does Novax need to be in the majority?

    He seems like someone who'd quite happily be in the minority.

    If the Serbian authorities want to take it up with him they can do, but it doesn't seem like they're bothered either.

    And now I really must go.
    I just don't think it makes me "blissfully naive" for thinking that most people will comply with the laws and regulations. That he doesn't, and in quite a spectacular fashion, is noteworthy.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    HYUFD said:

    Indeed, if Starmer fails to win a majority at the next general election, or at least most seats in a hung parliament, then he could still become PM even if the Tories have a majority in England still but he has a choice.

    1. Agree a deal with the SNP that requires indyref2 and devomax but means he cannot get England only legislation through.

    2. Agree a deal with the Conservatives that avoids indyref2 and means he can get England only legislation through but infuriates the left and the SNP.
    And in practice, 2) is off the table, because half the activists would go berserk, a good chunk of the MPs* would refuse to co-operate, and they'd get smashed at the next election (which would happen as soon as the Conservatives were confident they'd get a majority out of it; probably after around 18 months).

    It's baffling to me that people think that Conservative MPs would unnecessarily prop up a minority Labour administration, just out of sheer goodwill. Starmer's only doing the same now for long-term tactical reasons (correctly, and on an issue where his MPs are basically in favour anyway), and he's still getting it in the neck from various groupings on his side.

    *All the Corbynites, for starters; which is ironic when you think about how often their figurehead voted with the Conservatives the last time he was on the Government benches
  • If I Australia I would use the evidence he didn't follow the rules in Serbia as the reason to cancel his visa as he obviously can't be trusted to follow basic COVID protocols, when at this time in (we) Australia need everybody to make a national effort to ensure we minimise covid spread.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,045
    edited January 2022

    His twitter feed is about to explode....

    Andrew Lilico
    @andrew_lilico
    ·
    3m
    When you bear in mind these figures, suddenly the fact that over 150k people died doesn't seem so bad - that might be only 1/10 of what might hv happened. It's actually pretty remarkable there were as few deaths as there have been. Frownie critics miss this crucial context.

    And the smilies can't jump on it, either, because it would mean admitting that Ferguson was right in March 2020.

    (Well, technically, the estimate of 500,000 was wrong, but in the low direction)
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    So quite possibly didn't care that he had Covid then, just as many other people globally don't. That's an issue for the authorities wherever he was living at the time to take up if they choose to do so. He wouldn't be the first person on the planet to ignore a positive test and continued to socialise.

    If it wasn't a legal requirement to isolate here, I wouldn't do so following a positive test. Hopefully it won't be soon.
    Sounds to me like an unvaccinated individual who doesn't care whether they infect others is not the sort of individual the Australian Government want coming into their country.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 83,550
    edited January 2022

    And the smilies can't jump on it, either, because it would mean admitting that Ferguson was right in March 2020.

    (Well, technically, the estimate of 500,000 was wrong, but in the low direction)
    Over what time period was Ferguson estimate based? I honestly can't remember.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,113
    edited January 2022
    Endillion said:

    And in practice, 2) is off the table, because half the activists would go berserk, a good chunk of the MPs* would refuse to co-operate, and they'd get smashed at the next election (which would happen as soon as the Conservatives were confident they'd get a majority out of it; probably after around 18 months).

    It's baffling to me that people think that Conservative MPs would unnecessarily prop up a minority Labour administration, just out of sheer goodwill. Starmer's only doing the same now for long-term tactical reasons (correctly, and on an issue where his MPs are basically in favour anyway), and he's still getting it in the neck from various groupings on his side.

    *All the Corbynites, for starters; which is ironic when you think about how often their figurehead voted with the Conservatives the last time he was on the Government benches
    Indeed, Corbyn is already talking about starting his own party if not readimitted to Labour.

    If Starmer formed a minority government after the next general election with Tory support, Corbyn would definitely start that new party and take a number of leftwing Labour MPs with him.

    It would be like a UK Die Linke during the German years of grand coalition between the CDU and SPD
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,786
    edited January 2022
    HYUFD said:

    Indeed, if Starmer fails to win a majority at the next general election, or at least fails to win most seats in a hung parliament, then he could still become PM even if the Tories have a majority in England still but he has a choice.

    1. Agree a deal with the SNP that requires indyref2 and devomax but means he cannot get England only legislation through.

    2. Agree a deal with the Conservatives that avoids indyref2 and means he can get England only legislation through but infuriates the left and the SNP.
    3. Struggle on for a few months and then call another general election in short order to settle the matter one way or another (hopefully).
  • mickydroymickydroy Posts: 316

    My comment got lost at the end of the previous thread:

    On the opinion polls, it may well be that the Tories recover and sail to victory at the next GE.

    But what's interesting is the change of mood on PB. It's not so long ago that virtually everybody (right, centre, and left) thought that a Tory GE victory in 2024 or whenever was a slam dunk. The accepted view was that Starmer was hopeless, the Shadow Cabinet crap, and Labour moribund. Whereas Boris, to coin a phrase, had his finger on the metaphorical clitoris of enough of the British people to get away with anything and serve at least two terms.

    How that has changed. Many, if not most, posters seem to think a Labour minority government is reasonably likely, and even a handful think an outright Labour win is not inconceivable. Even HYUFD has been hinting that the Tories are unlikely to be in power next time around. The mood music has certainly changed, hasn't it?

    At the moment the written press have been quite happy to bite chunks off Johnson and the Tories, hence why labour have been edging up, at some time they are going to have to make a decision, if god forbid Johnson stays on till the next election, they are then going to have to pretend what an competent, hard working, PM he has been, and turn there guns on Labour, lets see what that does to the polls
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,786
    edited January 2022
    kinabalu said:

    We see him here ... We see him there ... He's so dedicated.
    A dedicated follower of fashion fascism?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,730
    Selebian said:

    I've ridden this train once before, due to Kinabalu pointing out the value when Starmer was ~8 (rode it down to 4.something and then got out).

    Same issues as before with it actually winning - need the narrowish window of Johson doing well enough to not get kicked out but bad enough for Starmer to be next PM, but likely value at 7.2. Guess I should go back in if those are still the odds, probably with a view to trading out again, though.

    Edit: traded out at 4.6, which was about the peak. Not often I manage to do that.

    A key part of the argument is that perhaps the window is not that narrow. Are the Tories not quite as ruthless at kicking out a failing leader as the narrative sometimes goes? And not just a party leader, but the person who is also PM? First rule of political betting is that people overestimate the probability of people being kicked out.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,353
    edited January 2022
    kinabalu said:

    We see him here ... We see him there ... He's so dedicated.
    The Pimpernel in mustard coloured moleskins.

    As was speculated upon last night, difficult to see what's in it for the Djokovics. I assume a call was made from Farage's pa (Nigel with a falsetto voice) saying he could help, and the logic was: very fine, important English gentleman, friend of a POTUS, let's go for it!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,236
    AlistairM said:
    What are the boxes at the top? Super cheap, hard, shiny bog roll?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 10,164
    FPT Huge thanks to @Fairliered for pointing out you need to hold the test button to check fire alarms are interlinked.

    That saved £220 has been added to my PB winnings stats.
  • Ladbrokes are offering 11/8 on BJ still being PM coming into the next GE.

    They're also offering 2/5 on SKS lasting until 2024 as Lab leader (pretty much the same thing as being so at next GE)

    I make that 2.325/1 for the double, which they should offer as I can't see how they're related contingencies.

    This represents a probability of 30% that BJ and SKS are leaders at the next election. Those who think it's much more likely should maybe pile on here.

    https://sports.ladbrokes.com/event/politics/uk/uk-politics/boris-johnson-specials/228803216/all-markets
    https://sports.ladbrokes.com/event/politics/uk/uk-politics/labour-party-leadership/230126969/all-markets
  • eekeek Posts: 29,741

    3. Struggle on for a few months and then call another general election in short order to settle the matter one way or another (hopefully).
    We've gone through 1 in the past and it's not required. The decision the SNP has is support Starmer or let the Tories in. Which would be a reason for SNP supporters to vote Labour in the second general election that would undoubtedly follow a general election with no sane result. Which leaves a more likely option as

    1b. Take power, wait for the SNP to vote against something and call a second general election
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,487
    Ha. I'm re-reading Ammianus Marcellus' history of The Later Roman Empire and he's excoriating Gallus for wanting a price freeze. I recall using that to mock Miliband's energy price cap nonsense, and now the selfsame daftness (imposed by the blues, not the reds!) is causing woe.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,786
    mickydroy said:

    At the moment the written press have been quite happy to bite chunks off Johnson and the Tories, hence why labour have been edging up, at some time they are going to have to make a decision, if god forbid Johnson stays on till the next election, they are then going to have to pretend what an competent, hard working, PM he has been, and turn there guns on Labour, lets see what that does to the polls
    Yes, I agree with that.

    But I suspect that a) the press will find it harder to big up Johnson than they did in 2019, and b) the press will find it harder to portray Starmer as an existential risk to the country than they did Corbyn in 2019.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Eabhal said:

    FPT Huge thanks to @Fairliered for pointing out you need to hold the test button to check fire alarms are interlinked.

    That saved £220 has been added to my PB winnings stats.

    Malkie doing the nags.
    Fairliered doing the tech support.
    Any other Scottish PBers want to do their bit for Eabhal’s bank balance?
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,786
    eek said:

    We've gone through 1 in the past and it's not required. The decision the SNP has is support Starmer or let the Tories in. Which would be a reason for SNP supporters to vote Labour in the second general election that would undoubtedly follow a general election with no sane result. Which leaves a more likely option as

    1b. Take power, wait for the SNP to vote against something and call a second general election
    Yes, that's what I meant.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Ha. I'm re-reading Ammianus Marcellus' history of The Later Roman Empire and he's excoriating Gallus for wanting a price freeze. I recall using that to mock Miliband's energy price cap nonsense, and now the selfsame daftness (imposed by the blues, not the reds!) is causing woe.

    Maggie must be spinning at 200 rpm.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Labour smarter than the SNP?

    Err… no.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Top of one league:



    Bottom of another:


  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,487
    Mr. Dickson, we must only hope that the blues have the spine to turf out the court jester, and manage to avoid imposing someone worse upon the nation (and themselves).
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    Or alternatively:

    SF opposition 33%
    FG/FF government 42%
    Next you’ll be telling us that the Lab/Con grand coalition was your idea all along.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,678


    So I didn't misread it, you've not factored in the overlap as I thought.

    Its not just a case of whether the GE outcome could be impacted by whether BJ is replaced, that is complex I agree.

    What is less complex is the expected GE outcome affecting whether BJ is replaced though.

    If the Tories look like losing the election then they're more likely to replace BJ and vice-versa.

    There's 4 possible outcomes and you've assigned the following probabilities to them. defining winning election as controlling Downing Street post-election:

    1: BJ not replaced, Tories win election: 2/6
    2: BJ not replaced, Labour win election: 2/6
    3: BJ replaced, Tories win election: 1/6
    4: BJ replaced, Labour win election: 1/6

    But the two questions aren't independent. Both 1 and 4 should be more likely, and 2 and 3 less likely.

    Not arguing with the maths, but you're assuming that the Tories see a bad result coming and go "oo-er, new leader time". Because replacing a leader is messy, it only hpapens when the situation is unambiguously bad. What is quite likely is that we go back to level pegging in the polls as the election approaches, and the Tories then don't want to rock the boat. On election day, however, voters think "Another 5 years of this? Nah." and don't turn out for the Tories.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Mr. Dickson, we must only hope that the blues have the spine to turf out the court jester, and manage to avoid imposing someone worse upon the nation (and themselves).

    On that issue we are united.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    My comment got lost at the end of the previous thread:

    On the opinion polls, it may well be that the Tories recover and sail to victory at the next GE.

    But what's interesting is the change of mood on PB. It's not so long ago that virtually everybody (right, centre, and left) thought that a Tory GE victory in 2024 or whenever was a slam dunk. The accepted view was that Starmer was hopeless, the Shadow Cabinet crap, and Labour moribund. Whereas Boris, to coin a phrase, had his finger on the metaphorical clitoris of enough of the British people to get away with anything and serve at least two terms.

    How that has changed. Many, if not most, posters seem to think a Labour minority government is reasonably likely, and even a handful think an outright Labour win is not inconceivable. Even HYUFD has been hinting that the Tories are unlikely to be in power next time around. The mood music has certainly changed, hasn't it?

    The mood music on here has changed but I still think the Tories will win a majority and there is even an outside chance they may increase. The situation can change back rapidly (what happens if Labour has a poor result in Erdington, for example) as can the mood music. Just because the music has swung against BJ doesn't mean it is permanent.

    It's also complicated by the fact there are so many marginal seats, admittedly on the old boundaries. Nearly 100 seats have a majority of sub 5% and around 170 with sub 10% majorities. It doesn't take much - whether lower turnout, slight swings etc - to get an extreme result.

    My personal view is that SMS is really hamstrung by three things: (1) his personality (2) the lack of understanding about what Labour actually stands for and (3) the cultural issues where, regardless of his words, there is inherent distrust of Labour from segments of the population. It is also worth pointing out that, while many on here have stated that BJ will find it difficult to get back his popularity when it is lost, the same goes for many of Labour's former voters who feel as though the party looks down on them as uneducated plebs. Once they go, you never get them back - your best hope is that they don't vote for your rivals.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,235

    Top of one league:



    Bottom of another:


    It's the age stratification of the UK rollout. Best in the world.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103
    Carnyx said:

    FPT for @RochdalePioneers - many thanks for comments re implementation period.

    Thanks. It's all been disrupted by covid anyway. And of course IIRC you moved up here after the original main announcement, come to think of it. I also suspect part of the problem is the fragmentation of the media - in the old days there'd be ads in the Scottish newspapers and public information filmettes on BBC Scotland and STV, Grampian and Border.

    Will see what happens, but we have the alarms ready to install DIY on both my houses (one my late parent's, to be sold) so i may as well get it done! No wish to risk playing silly buggers with insurance companies or house report surveyors over what an implementation period might or might not be.

    For sure they will not go round checking them , issue will arise if a) house burns down and insurance say no payout, b) you do alterations and building company / tradesmen insist you must comply blah blah , or c) you want to sell , need to get house report
  • eekeek Posts: 29,741
    MrEd said:

    The mood music on here has changed but I still think the Tories will win a majority and there is even an outside chance they may increase. The situation can change back rapidly (what happens if Labour has a poor result in Erdington, for example) as can the mood music. Just because the music has swung against BJ doesn't mean it is permanent.

    It's also complicated by the fact there are so many marginal seats, admittedly on the old boundaries. Nearly 100 seats have a majority of sub 5% and around 170 with sub 10% majorities. It doesn't take much - whether lower turnout, slight swings etc - to get an extreme result.

    My personal view is that SMS is really hamstrung by three things: (1) his personality (2) the lack of understanding about what Labour actually stands for and (3) the cultural issues where, regardless of his words, there is inherent distrust of Labour from segments of the population. It is also worth pointing out that, while many on here have stated that BJ will find it difficult to get back his popularity when it is lost, the same goes for many of Labour's former voters who feel as though the party looks down on them as uneducated plebs. Once they go, you never get them back - your best hope is that they don't vote for your rivals.
    As does Boris who has promised levelling up and after 2 years delivered sod all so far.

    And it's worth looking at Redcar, where you can clearly see that their are very happy to give other parties a chance but if those people fail to deliver they will return to Labour who at least deliver in part (which is always better than not at all).
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Not at the moment as there is a Tory majority in the UK and in England.

    In 2023/24 however if there is a Labour + SNP majority in the UK but a Tory majority still in England alone in a hung parliament, if the SNP continue to abstain on English only legislation then England would have its own parliament in all but name
    England free to do what they want so long as the ruling party in Scotland permits it.

    Sounds like England is a… what’s the word… colony?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Strange to remember that Labour led a few polls 12 years ago. Presumably many of those voters have decamped en masse to SF?
    … and the Social Democrats.

    Here’s one view:

    Can and should the Labour Party be saved?
    - Labour has derived little dividend from pushing liberal reform and must prioritise working people

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/can-and-should-the-labour-party-be-saved-1.4189478

  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,786
    HYUFD said:

    Indeed, Corbyn is already talking about starting his own party if not readimitted to Labour.

    If Starmer formed a minority government after the next general election with Tory support, Corbyn would definitely start that new party and take a number of leftwing Labour MPs with him.

    It would be like a UK Die Linke during the German years of grand coalition between the CDU and SPD
    The evidence that Corbyn is considering starting his own party is incredibly thin, comprising a bit of speculation in the press. His own Twitter feed indicates continuing support for Labour, and is devoted to attacking the Tories. And if, by any chance, Corbyn did go rogue, the number of Labour MPs he'd take with him would be in single figures, and I think would be nearer to 0 than 9.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,630

    Do you realise that I am quoting the CEO of NHS Providers who is quoting the CEO of NHS Trusts? Nobody other than you mentioned the total number, this is specific trusts / regions like the NW of England where hospitalisation looks set to overtop the previous record a year ago.

    The problem is as the NHS managers describe it at their hospitals to their CEO who tweets the facts.
    You seen the Times front page this morning?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103

    *a little off topic *🐖
    After Pope said too many petbabies you remember , they had dogbabies in my dad telegraph saying does the Pope have a point.
    I shared my master plan with my other half. We should have a teacup Pig.
    She was looking at me so heard me, but didn’t say anything. Maybe it was because she was drinking from a tea mug so got confused.
    That is a very miniature breed of pig I added.
    She took a long time but asked - what? In the Flat?
    Yes. I said. In the flat. Wilbur.
    She didn’t say anything. Then she put her headphones on and closed her eyes.

    Those of you been in relationships longer than me. Do I take this as master plan back to drawing board already? My vision thing can see how nice it would be having little Wilbur to look after

    image

    image

    Never said NO so you can always plead ignorance if it goes badly and blame her.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,818

    A dedicated follower of fashion fascism?
    That's exactly what was running through my head, yes. Slightly unfair but only slightly.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103

    'Often' is a very subjective description. They regularly vote on matters that are otherwise devolved to the Scottish Parliament.
    Nothing subjective about it, if only involving England they never ever vote. If it affects Scotland , ie Barnett or any other way then of course you would expect them to vote as it is NOT and English only vote.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Charles said:

    England free to do what they want so long as the ruling party in Scotland permits it.

    Sounds like England is a… what’s the word… colony?
    Poor wee souls.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,422
    Pulpstar said:

    It's the age stratification of the UK rollout. Best in the world.
    Which Starmer tried to banjax:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55828160

    Labour wants to bring forward the vaccination of key workers alongside others in high risk groups.

    As the Guernsey CMO patiently explained when asked, facing the same calls "who do you want me NOT to vaccinate so these people can be?"
  • pingping Posts: 3,805

    Strange to remember that Labour led a few polls 12 years ago. Presumably many of those voters have decamped en masse to SF?
    Yup. It’s one of the stories of global politics over the last 30 years. The nationalists always eat the leftists lunch.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    The evidence that Corbyn is considering starting his own party is incredibly thin, comprising a bit of speculation in the press. His own Twitter feed indicates continuing support for Labour, and is devoted to attacking the Tories. And if, by any chance, Corbyn did go rogue, the number of Labour MPs he'd take with him would be in single figures, and I think would be nearer to 0 than 9.
    Almost certainly true as of today.

    If Labour activists and MPs work their socks off to deliver a GE result in 2024 that wins enough seats to make Labour the largest party, and Starmer repays their hard work by going into coalition (formally or otherwise) with the Tories, then it starts to look less definitive.

    Put simply, what is the point of being a Labour party activist if the best you can hope for is being the marginally larger bit of a National Coalition with the Enemy?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,818

    The Pimpernel in mustard coloured moleskins.

    As was speculated upon last night, difficult to see what's in it for the Djokovics. I assume a call was made from Farage's pa (Nigel with a falsetto voice) saying he could help, and the logic was: very fine, important English gentleman, friend of a POTUS, let's go for it!
    Bizarre state of affairs. And it's spoilt my Djoko fanship. As a tennis player, I mean, not his 'body is my temple' stuff. I just can't be in the same place as the grim bunch who are jumping onto this.

    Murray's tweet about Farage was good.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 44,103

    Yes, that's what I meant.
    It is bollox though and only could be from someone who does not have a clue on Scottish politics. They would not change votes to Labour. The only way Labour have a chance of recovery in Scotland is if they embrace Independence , otherwise crap or not SNP are coasting (not that they deserve it ) .
  • Malkie doing the nags.
    Fairliered doing the tech support.
    Any other Scottish PBers want to do their bit for Eabhal’s bank balance?
    I think it is time I really got a "Round Tuit" and got some smoke/heat alarms installed before Nicola fines me.
    Luckily my son's father-in-law is a retired electrician.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,678



    The evidence that Corbyn is considering starting his own party is incredibly thin, comprising a bit of speculation in the press. His own Twitter feed indicates continuing support for Labour, and is devoted to attacking the Tories. And if, by any chance, Corbyn did go rogue, the number of Labour MPs he'd take with him would be in single figures, and I think would be nearer to 0 than 9.

    I think that's right, though I wouldn't rule out a bit of scare tactics on both sides at the moment - the naming of specific women candidates who the party might put up against him is in the same category.

    I'm not clear about Labnour's rulebook position anyway. As far as I recall, any member who's been a member for a few years is entitled to put themselves forward, and as a condition must say they are willing to accept the whip. Corbyn's position is "sure, I'll accept it tomorrow" and the leadership's position is "only when you've taken down that FB post and apologised". I don't think the rulebook says you must be willing to take the whip AND you must demonstrate that you'll be offered it. So as a member in good standing I don't see why he couldn't simply apply for reselection.

    It's true that the CLP is not as solidly left-wing as you might expect, but I've no doubt that he'd get reselected if he's able to apply.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 54,236

    Which Starmer tried to banjax:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55828160

    Labour wants to bring forward the vaccination of key workers alongside others in high risk groups.

    As the Guernsey CMO patiently explained when asked, facing the same calls "who do you want me NOT to vaccinate so these people can be?"
    "who do you want me NOT to vaccinate so these people can be?"

    Yes, that is the money quote in all this.

    The evidence was exceptionally clear - by far and away the biggest determinant of outcome, for the unvaccinated, was (and is) age.
  • eekeek Posts: 29,741
    Endillion said:

    Almost certainly true as of today.

    If Labour activists and MPs work their socks off to deliver a GE result in 2024 that wins enough seats to make Labour the largest party, and Starmer repays their hard work by going into coalition (formally or otherwise) with the Tories, then it starts to look less definitive.

    Put simply, what is the point of being a Labour party activist if the best you can hope for is being the marginally larger bit of a National Coalition with the Enemy?
    No party is going to go near the Tory party come the next election. The party is currently toxic and has form in completely screwing you up if you are the junior party (see the 2015 election).
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,609
    Eabhal said:

    FPT Huge thanks to @Fairliered for pointing out you need to hold the test button to check fire alarms are interlinked.

    That saved £220 has been added to my PB winnings stats.

    Glad to be of assistance!
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,609
    malcolmg said:

    For sure they will not go round checking them , issue will arise if a) house burns down and insurance say no payout, b) you do alterations and building company / tradesmen insist you must comply blah blah , or c) you want to sell , need to get house report
    a) could potentially be very expensive. OTOH how many people don’t have any, or insufficient, insurance?
  • eek said:

    No party is going to go near the Tory party come the next election. The party is currently toxic and has form in completely screwing you up if you are the junior party (see the 2015 election).
    Yes, there's no chance of this, whatsoever, I would say.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,609
    Any reason why England only legislation can’t be conducted on Monday and Tuesday, with UK wide legislation conducted on Wednesday, Thursday on Friday?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,609

    Yes, there's no chance of this, whatsoever, I would say.
    Would even the DUP trust the Tory party next time?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    "who do you want me NOT to vaccinate so these people can be?"

    Yes, that is the money quote in all this.

    The evidence was exceptionally clear - by far and away the biggest determinant of outcome, for the unvaccinated, was (and is) age.
    It’s almost as if a lot of countries were padding their stats vaccinating people (eg children) who overall would gain only marginal benefit and then using these stats to claim that the success of the U.K. rollout was a mirage.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,468
    Dura_Ace said:

    I suspect the optimistic calculation is that they are buying favour and goodwill with the US defence establishment and having some tanks thrown in as a bonus.
    Or the realization that protecting their interests in Asia Pacific is something they can only do as part of an alliance and that, in such an alliance, they need to pull their weight at least a bit, rather than just being a parasite.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,782
    kinabalu said:

    Bizarre state of affairs. And it's spoilt my Djoko fanship. As a tennis player, I mean, not his 'body is my temple' stuff. I just can't be in the same place as the grim bunch who are jumping onto this.

    Murray's tweet about Farage was good.
    This article does a good job of explaining why some of us have always been Nadal/Federer guys.
    https://tedgioia.substack.com/p/you-dont-need-a-mentorfind-a-nemesis
  • eekeek Posts: 29,741

    Would even the DUP trust the Tory party next time?
    What's in it for the DUP - the things they would want can't be achieved...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,782
    eek said:

    No party is going to go near the Tory party come the next election. The party is currently toxic and has form in completely screwing you up if you are the junior party (see the 2015 election).
    After the LibDem experience with the considerably less toxic Tories of 2010, it would require a party of the clinically insane.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    eek said:

    No party is going to go near the Tory party come the next election. The party is currently toxic and has form in completely screwing you up if you are the junior party (see the 2015 election).
    Precisely. So we are agreed it has no chance of happening.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,782
    Laudable action from the European data protection regulator.
    It looks like the start of a fight over what can be retained by the security bureaucrats,

    A data ‘black hole’: Europol ordered to delete vast store of personal data
    EU police body accused of unlawfully holding information and aspiring to become an NSA-style mass surveillance agency
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/10/a-data-black-hole-europol-ordered-to-delete-vast-store-of-personal-data
This discussion has been closed.