Howdy, Stranger!

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

YouGov’s CON members’ polling head to heads – politicalbetting.com

1567810

Comments

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100

    You've ruffled his feathers and he will now target you. You're doing well, keep going!
    Ah, the hypersensitive snowflake speaks.

    One who can dish it out, but absolutely can't take it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100
    kle4 said:

    What ratio is to be aimed for?
    I'd say par is about 4/1 not 10/1
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,849
    MikeL said:

    Anyone know why Liz has gone from 1.43 to 1.50 today?

    Nothing obvious. Perhaps a feeling Rishi had been oversold.
    Sunak's Grantham speech today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4R_MEi_dTM

    But it is not a big change in price. If you take the implied probabilities, the market thought this morning Liz Truss had a 69 per cent chance, and now a 67 per cent chance; and of course Rishi has gone up by two percentage points.
  • At this point, I think Labour would make a success out of Brexit - whatever that means - with Starmer at the helm. The Tories don't have a clue, they've had plenty of chances. Goodbye.

    And yet Starmer hasn't got a clue or any ideas. All he ever says is what he's against, not what he's for.

    Truss and Sunak have two different visions, competing sets of genuine ideas. You may or may not like them, but there's substance there.

    Behind Starmer there's what? What actual substance or ideas?

    Make Brexit Work is up there with Brexit Means Brexit for it's vacuity.
  • Ah, the hypersensitive snowflake speaks.

    One who can dish it out, but absolutely can't take it.
    You get angry about signs in Waterloo station saying don't be racist
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,324
    I am about to have some weed via the CRATER 420
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163
    "some of Truss’s internal [Tory] detractors fear that she won’t just be “continuity Boris, but continuity Trump”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/22/brexit-liz-truss-delusion-rishi-sunak-tory-members

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163
    Sunak has slipped below 3.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,309

    And yet Starmer hasn't got a clue or any ideas. All he ever says is what he's against, not what he's for.

    Truss and Sunak have two different visions, competing sets of genuine ideas. You may or may not like them, but there's substance there.

    Behind Starmer there's what? What actual substance or ideas?

    Make Brexit Work is up there with Brexit Means Brexit for it's vacuity.

    Starmer's a void. Maybe it's clever politics, and not wanting to frighten the horses before a general election, or maybe he's a really dull and unimaginative person with no big ideas rattling around in his bonce.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,767

    Nothing obvious. Perhaps a feeling Rishi had been oversold.
    Sunak's Grantham speech today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4R_MEi_dTM

    But it is not a big change in price. If you take the implied probabilities, the market thought this morning Liz Truss had a 69 per cent chance, and now a 67 per cent chance; and of course Rishi has gone up by two percentage points.
    Thanks - agreed, not a big move, but still enough to be notable.

    Now just gone 1.52 in last few mins.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,120
    glw said:

    Starmer's a void. Maybe it's clever politics, and not wanting to frighten the horses before a general election, or maybe he's a really dull and unimaginative person with no big ideas rattling around in his bonce.
    Worked for Cameron.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,324
    OK I'm stoned already
  • glwglw Posts: 10,309
    edited July 2022
    ydoethur said:

    Worked for Cameron.

    Well if your only goal is becoming leader I suppose that is correct, but I'd like to think that potential PMs have more ambition than merely getting the job.
  • Leon said:

    OK I'm stoned already

    How will we tell the difference?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,849
    MikeL said:

    Thanks - agreed, not a big move, but still enough to be notable.

    Now just gone 1.52 in last few mins.
    And while not significant, that might be significant. Why? Because the Sunday papers!
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    These are some of the things I’d like to see from Labour regarding the EU .

    A new mobility scheme for students upto 26 to be able to work in each other’s countries for upto 2 years . Going back into Erasmus . A vet agreement. Easing of rules for the creative industries , bringing back the joint visa for school children for day trips and holidays . I’d also like to see the UK put pressure on the EU to relax the 90 day rule so that UK nationals can spend upto 180 days in one go .

    I don’t think there’s anything controversial in those things . Leave won but no 10 never bothered with giving just a few scraps to Remainers , it was a case of you lost get over it without any acceptance that the result was close .

    This has been one of the issues. No 10 has been obsessed with severing every link with the EU in areas that I don’t think Leavers were that bothered about.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,442
    They tried to stiff us over Erasmus. I’m all for student exchange, have hosted loads, but it should be reasonable.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,849

    Betfair next prime minister
    1.51 Liz Truss 66%
    3 Rishi Sunak 33%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.5 Liz Truss 67%
    3 Rishi Sunak 33%

    Betfair next prime minister
    1.52 Liz Truss 66%
    2.96 Rishi Sunak 34%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.52 Liz Truss 66%
    2.94 Rishi Sunak 34%

    A small move to Rishi. Rumours of polls or other Sunday paper content?
  • Cameron's 2010 election platform was essentially, Labour crashed the car and caused the global recession, we didn't - vote for us.

    Starmer's 2024 platform will be, the Tories crashed the car and caused the economic blackhole we're in, we didn't - vote for us.

    I have said since day one, his strategy is Cameron's. When you understand that, it is completely clear what he is doing.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163

    And while not significant, that might be significant. Why? Because the Sunday papers!
    If there is some serious shit to be thrown around via the papers this must be the weekend to do it given ballots are going out v shortly.

  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,380

    And yet Starmer hasn't got a clue or any ideas. All he ever says is what he's against, not what he's for.

    Truss and Sunak have two different visions, competing sets of genuine ideas. You may or may not like them, but there's substance there.

    Behind Starmer there's what? What actual substance or ideas?

    Make Brexit Work is up there with Brexit Means Brexit for it's vacuity.
    Labour's position is that "we've left and aren't going back in for a generation. But we can make this Brexit deal better by negotiating a slightly softer Brexit deal which solves the NI problem, lets musicians travel to EU countries more easily etc.' This is much more akin Labour's 2017 strategy when it comes to Brexit which worked rather well, as opposed to the disastrous 2019 one.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163
    Leon said:

    OK I'm stoned already

    I will be honest, I'm not sure this is a good idea.

    Get back to the wine.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,801

    Cameron's 2010 election platform was essentially, Labour crashed the car and caused the global recession, we didn't - vote for us.

    Starmer's 2024 platform will be, the Tories crashed the car and caused the economic blackhole we're in, we didn't - vote for us.

    I have said since day one, his strategy is Cameron's. When you understand that, it is completely clear what he is doing.

    Will we get an SKS version of The Big Society? :D
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,395

    I'd say par is about 4/1 not 10/1
    I'm not sure this is good metric to measure the quality of your post. I'm at 60% likes and you are at about 25%. Does that make me better than you. If not then why is your 25% compared to his 10% important.

    I don't think any of us post for the likes.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,324

    How will we tell the difference?
    I've got the munchies
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400

    Because to most people sovereignty means being supreme at making your own choices, not abiding by other people's choices and having to stick with that without a say.

    If a wife in a controlling relationship is constantly told what to do by a domineering husband, and she is desperately unhappy and wants to live her own way, but she has a right to get away from him and divorce him ... would you tell her that sticking with him as he dominates and tells her what to do means she's in control as she has the choice to leave him, therefore she shouldn't get divorced because she's in control by letting him dominate her?
    If that woman borrows money from a bank and has to re-pay it, would you say she’s not supreme at making her own choices? If she wants to go on holiday to Bali, but realises she can’t afford to, does that make her not supreme at making her own choices? If she votes for politicians who want cannabis to be illegal, or even if she votes for ones that want cannabis to be legal, but they don’t win, and cannabis is illegal, and she has a toke and gets arrested, is she supreme at making her own choices? People live in the real world and their choices are constrained by context, sometimes by their own past choices, sometimes just by their situation.

    A country choosing to be in the EU, is that more like a wife with a domineering husband, or someone going into a partnership with others to open a baking goods store? You can throw around this nice sounding analogies about controlling husbands, but that’s just rhetoric. It sheds no light on the actual politics, because countries are not people and your analogy is ridiculously loaded.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,395
    Leon said:

    OK I'm stoned already

    I assumed that happened hours ago.
  • Cameron's 2010 election platform was essentially, Labour crashed the car and caused the global recession, we didn't - vote for us.

    Starmer's 2024 platform will be, the Tories crashed the car and caused the economic blackhole we're in, we didn't - vote for us.

    I have said since day one, his strategy is Cameron's. When you understand that, it is completely clear what he is doing.

    Which is fine if you want to succeed by default and you're putting all your eggs in your opponents screwing up, then don't frighten the horses can work.

    But Cameron put a lot more work in, came up with a lot more ideas, and he still didn't get a majority from a much closer starting point and nearly ended up losing the election.

    If Starmer wants to be an empty suit for people to project their own hopes and dreams onto he's entitled to do that, but he's got no vision or ideas then and people might decide to back away from that in the end.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,801
    Leon said:

    OK I'm stoned already

    Didn't you have major drug addiction problems when you were younger? Not sure "dabbling" is a good idea?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163
    glw said:

    Well if your only goal is becoming leader I suppose that is correct, but I'd like to think that potential PMs have more ambition than merely getting the job.
    When was the last time that someone who actually had a big idea how to change the country became PM? Not just "it should be me, make it me, I'm better" mentality but actually wanted the job to do something?

    Blair?

    Thatcher? Definitely she fits my description.

  • Labour's position is that "we've left and aren't going back in for a generation. But we can make this Brexit deal better by negotiating a slightly softer Brexit deal which solves the NI problem, lets musicians travel to EU countries more easily etc.' This is much more akin Labour's 2017 strategy when it comes to Brexit which worked rather well, as opposed to the disastrous 2019 one.
    If Labour had followed Starmer's original Brexit policy (i.e. EFTA, as outlined in Left Out), as soon as GE17 was over, they'd have been in the position to win an election. Alas, Seumus got involved
  • Which is fine if you want to succeed by default and you're putting all your eggs in your opponents screwing up, then don't frighten the horses can work.

    But Cameron put a lot more work in, came up with a lot more ideas, and he still didn't get a majority from a much closer starting point and nearly ended up losing the election.

    If Starmer wants to be an empty suit for people to project their own hopes and dreams onto he's entitled to do that, but he's got no vision or ideas then and people might decide to back away from that in the end.
    Really? What ideas were those?
  • I will be honest, I'm not sure this is a good idea.

    Get back to the wine.
    What's the danger? Are you worried he's going to undergo some psychosis and start babbling about aliens and conspiracies about lab leaked viruses?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400

    You get angry about signs in Waterloo station saying don't be racist
    To be fair, he got angry about signs in Waterloo saying don’t be misogynistic.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,324
    GIN1138 said:

    Didn't you have major drug addiction problems when you were younger? Not sure "dabbling" is a good idea?
    REEEEELAXXXXXX

    I've never been THAT into weed, I won't start now. Besides, all you lot have been kindly advising me to rein in the booze, so this is y


    *runs into kitchen looking for Brie*
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163

    How will we tell the difference?
    He'll be telling us about the 18 inch pineapple topped pizza that has just been delivered in a couple of hours once the "munchies" kick in.

  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    Imagine you are Leicestershire. Bottom of the table without a win.
    Make 584 first innings and have Glamorgan 9-2.
    Somehow manage to eventually lose by an innings and 28 runs.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163

    What's the danger? Are you worried he's going to undergo some psychosis and start babbling about aliens and conspiracies about lab leaked viruses?
    LOL.

    Could be the opposite. The skunk could turn him into a mild mannered commentator on political events who no longer sees the four horsemen riding down the street alongside alien spaceships outside his window.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,801
    Leon said:

    REEEEELAXXXXXX

    I've never been THAT into weed, I won't start now. Besides, all you lot have been kindly advising me to rein in the booze, so this is y


    *runs into kitchen looking for Brie*
    No, I thought you had a problem Heroin/opiates when you was younger? Maybe I've got that wrong? But if you did, I'd be wary of getting into weed as these things can escalate quickly with addicts.

    But up to you of course..
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886

    What's the danger? Are you worried he's going to undergo some psychosis and start babbling about aliens and conspiracies about lab leaked viruses?
    As long as it isn't Brexit or woke that's just peachy.
  • I hold Seumus almost entirely responsible for the failure of Labour under Corbyn, man was a muppet. Of course Corbyn appointed him so is ultimately responsible but all of the bad decisions, he was involved with.

    GE19 - Semus
    Russian poisoning response - Seumus
    Brexit policy - Seumus
    Anti-Semitism response - Seumus

    If only Corbyn had taken on board Kevin Schofield who was pitching himself for the job...
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,492

    I dont know the answer for that, but part of me dies inside when an absolute ‘zinger’ gets no likes at all...
    Nobody likes me, everybody hates me
    I think I’ll go eat worms!
    Big fat juicy ones
    Eensie weensy squeensy ones
    See how they wiggle and squirm!

    Down goes the first one, down goes the second one
    Oh how they wiggle and squirm!
    Up comes the first one, up comes the second one
    Oh how they wiggle and squirm!

    I bite off the heads, and suck out the juice
    And throw the skins away!
    Nobody knows how fat I grow
    On worms three times a day!

    Nobody likes me, everybody hates me
    I think I’ll go eat worms!
    Big fat juicy ones
    Eensie weensy squeensy ones
    See how they wiggle and squirm!
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,560
    edited July 2022

    I dont know the answer for that, but part of me dies inside when an absolute ‘zinger’ gets no likes at all...
    Especially when it comes at the fag end of a thread.

    I was so proud of my joke the other day with the extra money being paid to the EU because of the A50 extension that we should send the bill to Benn...
  • Seems to me that anyone sensible in the Tory Party is on Sunak's team, leaver or remainer.

    And I think most of their policies of recent decades have been a disaster - but that has got to tell you something.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,324
    Just ordered 3 packs of gutted dried anchovies
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163
    Tory grandees who served in Margaret Thatcher’s final cabinet have warned that the former prime minister would never have approved of Liz Truss’s plan to slash £30bn off taxes funded by borrowing, as Rishi Sunak denounced his opponent’s plans as “immoral”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/23/thatcher-ministers-liz-truss-tax-cut-plans-patten-lamont-rifkind
  • And HYUFD!

    That has got to tell you something.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,849

    Nobody likes me, everybody hates me
    I think I’ll go eat worms!
    Big fat juicy ones
    Eensie weensy squeensy ones
    See how they wiggle and squirm!

    Down goes the first one, down goes the second one
    Oh how they wiggle and squirm!
    Up comes the first one, up comes the second one
    Oh how they wiggle and squirm!

    I bite off the heads, and suck out the juice
    And throw the skins away!
    Nobody knows how fat I grow
    On worms three times a day!

    Nobody likes me, everybody hates me
    I think I’ll go eat worms!
    Big fat juicy ones
    Eensie weensy squeensy ones
    See how they wiggle and squirm!
    Punk version. Anne Nightingale used to play it a lot:-
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czRsdzCBF1Y
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886

    Tory grandees who served in Margaret Thatcher’s final cabinet have warned that the former prime minister would never have approved of Liz Truss’s plan to slash £30bn off taxes funded by borrowing, as Rishi Sunak denounced his opponent’s plans as “immoral”.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/23/thatcher-ministers-liz-truss-tax-cut-plans-patten-lamont-rifkind

    And they aren't wrong.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,492
    edited July 2022
    kjh said:

    I assumed that happened hours ago.
    If it had, he would have been less aggressive this afternoon.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,370
    edited July 2022
    The problem I have with the "slavery fuelled the Industrial Revolution" argument is that slavery and slave trading both retard economic development.

    The USA gives us the perfect worked example. By 1860, the Free North East and Mid West was industrialising swiftly, the Slave South barely at all. The profits of slaving generally went not to investing in new businesses and industries, but to expensive forms of conspicuous consumption - grand houses, artworks, race horses, and fancy slaves, whose prices got bid upwards. Slavery also fostered a mentality among the slave owners that works against hard work, sobriety, innovation, all the things you need to grow new businesses. Most slavers died heavily in debt because of their absurdly lavish lifestyles.

    Likewise the Ottoman Empire and its vassal states owned and traded slaves on a vast scale, and sponsored slave hunting in Africa, to the great benefit of much of their elite, but to no benefit at all for the mass of the population. Ditto Spanish and Portugese America, whose economies were stagnating by the 1800's.

    The Industrial Revolution was disproportionately the work of nonconformists, the types of people who tended mostly to despise slavery.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277

    They tried to stiff us over Erasmus. I’m all for student exchange, have hosted loads, but it should be reasonable.

    Except that’s not true . The EU wanted the UK to sign up for 7 years which is the normal timeframe for third countries and pay an association fee . This wasn’t controversial. The UK only wanted to participate in elements of Erasmus and wouldn’t commit to the full time period .

    It’s more about some in governments hatred of anything that continues strong cultural ties with the EU .
  • https://twitter.com/krishgm/status/1550071760015474688

    Krishnan Guru-Murthy: The Tory candidates have pitched this around who is the most Thatcherite. Labour have largely tracked back to Blair. Obviously there are some differences but in an extraordinary time we see relatively few new ideas. Is the next 21st century election Thatcherites v Blairites?

    Yes Labour is back to winning elections.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,560
    glw said:

    Starmer's a void. Maybe it's clever politics, and not wanting to frighten the horses before a general election, or maybe he's a really dull and unimaginative person with no big ideas rattling around in his bonce.
    Trouble is, if it's the former it might get him elected but it will make it more difficult to get support for his policies if he doesn't spring them on the people until after he's in Downing Street.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,337

    How will we tell the difference?
    More mellow?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,492
    Leon said:

    Just ordered 3 packs of gutted dried anchovies

    I think you need a holiday, @Leon.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,120
    Leon said:

    Just ordered 3 packs of gutted dried anchovies

    Why are they gutted? Are they Sunak fans?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,550

    At this point, I think Labour would make a success out of Brexit - whatever that means - with Starmer at the helm. The Tories don't have a clue, they've had plenty of chances. Goodbye.

    Yes but I'd put it differently.

    This bunch of Tories will leave a mess in large part because of Brexit.

    Labour will come in and improve things - and not a single thing they do to achieve this improvement would have been prevented by EU membership.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,407

    If Labour had followed Starmer's original Brexit policy (i.e. EFTA, as outlined in Left Out), as soon as GE17 was over, they'd have been in the position to win an election. Alas, Seumus got involved
    This Starmer revisionary period is the best thing that's happened in terms of Labour's electability since Blair. If they'd aimed for EFTA they'd be bogged down in detail, and anyway it would have smacked of circumventing the decision.

    Reeves is their single greatest asset - she's the first Labour politician ever to make some sort of economic sense.

    A heady brew of daftness keeps them unelectable of course, but, as a Tory, I worry a little.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,442
    nico679 said:

    Except that’s not true . The EU wanted the UK to sign up for 7 years which is the normal timeframe for third countries and pay an association fee . This wasn’t controversial. The UK only wanted to participate in elements of Erasmus and wouldn’t commit to the full time period .

    It’s more about some in governments hatred of anything that continues strong cultural ties with the EU .
    Right - an association fee for exchanges. That’s the bit that is wrong. It’s about exchange, so why pay an association fee?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100

    You get angry about signs in Waterloo station saying don't be racist
    It was "sexist hate stops with men", actually. And it's you who hasn't been able to shut up about them ever since, not me.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,560

    They tried to stiff us over Erasmus. I’m all for student exchange, have hosted loads, but it should be reasonable.

    I was at a university open day a few weeks ago, and the study abroad head was really positive about Turing.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,801

    https://twitter.com/krishgm/status/1550071760015474688

    Krishnan Guru-Murthy: The Tory candidates have pitched this around who is the most Thatcherite. Labour have largely tracked back to Blair. Obviously there are some differences but in an extraordinary time we see relatively few new ideas. Is the next 21st century election Thatcherites v Blairites?

    Yes Labour is back to winning elections.

    Trouble they are all terribly inferior to the real thing... :(
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,079
    edited July 2022
    IshmaelZ said:

    The newly formed likenpolizei add a whole new level of terror to posting on PB

    Lol. Love it! Post of the day!!
  • LeonLeon Posts: 59,324
    kle4 said:

    More mellow?
    Surely you mean EVEN more mellow?
  • It was "sexist hate stops with men", actually. And it's you who hasn't been able to shut up about them ever since, not me.
    You can never shut up about wokeism is destroying the world, this is just the latest example of it. Even though nobody actually knows or cares what you are on about.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,442
    Driver said:

    I was at a university open day a few weeks ago, and the study abroad head was really positive about Turing.
    Yes, exchange doesn’t have to be based on Erasmus. I expect we will be sending plenty of our pharmacy students overseas this September as normal.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,560
    edited July 2022

    Cameron's 2010 election platform was essentially, Labour crashed the car and caused the global recession, we didn't - vote for us.

    Starmer's 2024 platform will be, the Tories crashed the car and caused the economic blackhole we're in, we didn't - vote for us.

    I have said since day one, his strategy is Cameron's. When you understand that, it is completely clear what he is doing.

    Cameron started from a smaller deficit and still didn't win a majority. And he certainly had more policies by the equivalent of now than Sir Keir does.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100
    kjh said:

    I'm not sure this is good metric to measure the quality of your post. I'm at 60% likes and you are at about 25%. Does that make me better than you. If not then why is your 25% compared to his 10% important.

    I don't think any of us post for the likes.
    Which actually makes it far worse for him given he's only got 10% from 2.9k comments.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,492

    He'll be telling us about the 18 inch pineapple topped pizza that has just been delivered in a couple of hours once the "munchies" kick in.

    If he tells us it was delivered by TSE, we’ll know he is totally out of it. 🤪
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,866
    edited July 2022
    dixiedean said:

    As long as it isn't Brexit or woke that's just peachy.
    It will be more like this


  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,550

    Er, no. It's a reflection of you.

    The "votes" speak for themselves.
    But you were just moaning before about really bad posts getting lots of likes!

    Now you're saying no likes = bad posts.

    What is THIS a reflection of?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100

    Betfair next prime minister
    1.52 Liz Truss 66%
    2.96 Rishi Sunak 34%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.52 Liz Truss 66%
    2.94 Rishi Sunak 34%

    A small move to Rishi. Rumours of polls or other Sunday paper content?
    Value Truss, I think.

    If she dribbles out to 1.6+ after Monday's debate I am going back in.
  • Omnium said:

    This Starmer revisionary period is the best thing that's happened in terms of Labour's electability since Blair. If they'd aimed for EFTA they'd be bogged down in detail, and anyway it would have smacked of circumventing the decision.

    Reeves is their single greatest asset - she's the first Labour politician ever to make some sort of economic sense.

    A heady brew of daftness keeps them unelectable of course, but, as a Tory, I worry a little.
    Starmer managed to destroy Corbynism and the left from the inside - I am sure as a Tory you can be pleased about that. The man has some sort of talent, not sure it yet means winning elections but he sure knows how to win over the Labour Party and then do the opposite, only Blair has recently managed the same
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Sean_F said:

    The problem I have with the "slavery fuelled the Industrial Revolution" argument is that slavery and slave trading both retard economic development.

    The USA gives us the perfect worked example. By 1860, the Free North East and Mid West was industrialising swiftly, the Slave South barely at all. The profits of slaving generally went not to investing in new businesses and industries, but to expensive forms of conspicuous consumption - grand houses, artworks, race horses, and fancy slaves, whose prices got bid upwards. Slavery also fostered a mentality among the slave owners that works against hard work, sobriety, innovation, all the things you need to grow new businesses. Most slavers died heavily in debt because of their absurdly lavish lifestyles.

    Likewise the Ottoman Empire and its vassal states owned and traded slaves on a vast scale, and sponsored slave hunting in Africa, to the great benefit of much of their elite, but to no benefit at all for the mass of the population. Ditto Spanish and Portugese America, whose economies were stagnating by the 1800's.

    The Industrial Revolution was disproportionately the work of nonconformists, the types of people who tended mostly to despise slavery.

    That is pure gibberish. Yes slavery is uneconomic *given the industrial revolution* but nobody claims that the IR was a thing in the heyday of the slave revolution.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 43,132
    ydoethur said:

    Why are they gutted? Are they Sunak fans?
    They're being munched on by a raddled old phallus artificer on a Saturday night, I'd be gutted too.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400

    Right - an association fee for exchanges. That’s the bit that is wrong. It’s about exchange, so why pay an association fee?
    If you’re in the EU and contributing that way, you don’t pay a fee, but third countries pay a fee. We picked which of those we wanted to be.

  • MPartridgeMPartridge Posts: 174
    dixiedean said:

    Imagine you are Leicestershire. Bottom of the table without a win.
    Make 584 first innings and have Glamorgan 9-2.
    Somehow manage to eventually lose by an innings and 28 runs.

    I've just looked at the scorecard.

    That is insane.

    Northeast scored 410 not out as well....
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited July 2022
    Driver said:

    Cameron started from a smaller deficit and still didn't win a majority. And he certainly had more policies by the equivalent of now than Sir Keir does.
    He did become the Prime Minister however - and that is ultimately what Starmer is trying to do.

    So many policies, what were these?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    edited July 2022
    Omnium said:

    This Starmer revisionary period is the best thing that's happened in terms of Labour's electability since Blair. If they'd aimed for EFTA they'd be bogged down in detail, and anyway it would have smacked of circumventing the decision.

    Reeves is their single greatest asset - she's the first Labour politician ever to make some sort of economic sense.

    A heady brew of daftness keeps them unelectable of course, but, as a Tory, I worry a little.
    Reminds me of the pre-2010 situation.
    Government floundering about. Clearly on its last legs.
    But with largely unscary opposition headed by an untried bloke who'd focussed mainly on internal party reform without much policy differences. With an impressive Shadow Chancellor.
    I was relatively sanguine at the time.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100

    Ironically, a Labour government might make the UK more accepting of Brexit. By removing the ERG having any influence over the Prime Minister and government, and with Labour negotiating a fresh deal which mitigates some of our present problems might convince some people that it was wrong that perhaps it's not too bad.
    Fair point, actually.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Opinium is 37 lab 34 con 13 LD 6 Green 3 SNP
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163
    Only one audience has ever mattered in any of this: the 160K membership of the party who vote next month.
  • Really? What ideas were those?
    1. Cancelling Labour's planned Jobs Tax (aka National Insurance) rise and cutting Corporation Tax. (relevant to today's Tory leadership contest?)
    2. Abolishing planned ID Cards
    3. "Hug a hoodie" reforms to criminal justice.
    4. Blocking Blair's detention without trial.
    5. Abolishing Gordon Brown's Financial Services Authority and returning supervisory roles back to the Bank of England
    6. The "pupil premium" for schools that take disadvantaged children.
    7. Free schools
    8. Elected Police and Crime Commissioners to be introduced
    9. Raising the age for retirement.
    10. Reforming the NHS

    Those are some of them. Whether you think they're good or bad ideas, were implemented well or badly, is debatable but there were ideas there.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,866
    edited July 2022
    Sean_F said:

    The problem I have with the "slavery fuelled the Industrial Revolution" argument is that slavery and slave trading both retard economic development.

    The USA gives us the perfect worked example. By 1860, the Free North East and Mid West was industrialising swiftly, the Slave South barely at all. The profits of slaving generally went not to investing in new businesses and industries, but to expensive forms of conspicuous consumption - grand houses, artworks, race horses, and fancy slaves, whose prices got bid upwards. Slavery also fostered a mentality among the slave owners that works against hard work, sobriety, innovation, all the things you need to grow new businesses. Most slavers died heavily in debt because of their absurdly lavish lifestyles.

    Likewise the Ottoman Empire and its vassal states owned and traded slaves on a vast scale, and sponsored slave hunting in Africa, to the great benefit of much of their elite, but to no benefit at all for the mass of the population. Ditto Spanish and Portugese America, whose economies were stagnating by the 1800's.

    The Industrial Revolution was disproportionately the work of nonconformists, the types of people who tended mostly to despise slavery.

    The whole point of an Industrial Revolution is to substitute machines for people (and animals). H.P. rather than horse power (or human power.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163
    GIN1138 said:

    Trouble they are all terribly inferior to the real thing... :(
    Have Labour tracked back to Blair? If so, I must have missed it.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited July 2022

    1. Cancelling Labour's planned Jobs Tax (aka National Insurance) rise and cutting Corporation Tax. (relevant to today's Tory leadership contest?)
    2. Abolishing planned ID Cards
    3. "Hug a hoodie" reforms to criminal justice.
    4. Blocking Blair's detention without trial.
    5. Abolishing Gordon Brown's Financial Services Authority and returning supervisory roles back to the Bank of England
    6. The "pupil premium" for schools that take disadvantaged children.
    7. Free schools
    8. Elected Police and Crime Commissioners to be introduced
    9. Raising the age for retirement.
    10. Reforming the NHS

    Those are some of them. Whether you think they're good or bad ideas, were implemented well or badly, is debatable but there were ideas there.
    And I can find 10 policies Labour has announced if you would like?

    The point is that Cameron didn't win for those policies, he won because he said Labour had crashed the economy.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited July 2022
    And forced choice in opinium is 42 36 lab and Starmer vs con and Sunak, 40 39 versus Con and Truss.
    Race tightening
    Sunak scores slightly better on will make a good PM
  • Absolutely. Stuff any whinging interest groups wanting to be sheltered from competition.

    If Kiwi lamb is better or cheaper than British lamb, why shouldn't we take advantage of that?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Rishi Sunak looks more like a PM in waiting than Keir Starmer and Liz Truss, but none of them look like an obvious PM.

    > 34% agree Sunak looks like a PM in waiting vs 35% disagree (net -1)
    > Starmer: 30% agree vs 39% disagree (net -9)
    > Truss: 25% agree vs 37% disagree (net -12) https://t.co/DKqrYzaNqH
  • Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 37% (-1)
    CON: 34% (+1)
    LDM: 13% (+1)
    GRN: 6% (=)

    via @OpiniumResearch, 21-22 Jul

    (Changes with 8 Jul)
  • And I can find 10 policies Labour has announced if you would like?

    The point is that Cameron didn't win for those policies, he won because he said Labour had crashed the economy.
    Go ahead, please, I would be utterly amazed if you can find 10 policies Labour have announced.

    Whether Cameron won for his ideas or not, he had them. What has Starmer got?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    LATEST POLLING ON TORY LEADERSHIP RACE

    Opinium @ObserverUK poll shows public opinion undecided on Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss:

    > 43% think Sunak would be good PM vs 45% bad (net -2)
    > 36% think Truss would be good PM vs 41% bad (net -6) https://t.co/KC8i1jh1Sh
  • Opinium most likely to give a Tory lead IMHO, if you can bet on a Tory lead with them I'd say there is value in there
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 38,370

    The whole point of an Industrial Revolution is to substitute machines for people (and animals). H.P. rather than horse power (or human power.
    Sure. My interest is more in the way that ownership and trade in slaves (like any form of economics based upon plunder) actually works against economic development. It's similar to the curse of natural resources. The profits get captured by a tiny elite who then spend lavishly.
  • If you were forced to choose, which of these would you prefer?

    A Labour government led by Keir Starmer: 42%
    A Conservative government led by Rishi Sunak: 36%

    via @OpiniumResearch, 21-22 Jul
  • If you were forced to choose, which of these would you prefer?

    A Labour government led by Keir Starmer: 40%
    A Conservative government led by Liz Truss: 39%

    via @OpiniumResearch, 21-22 Jul
This discussion has been closed.