Howdy, Stranger!

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

LAB opens a 40% gap over CON in London – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,032
edited April 2023 in General
imageLAB opens a 40% gap over CON in London – politicalbetting.com

Exactly a month on from now we will be pouring over the latest local election results and if the national polls are in any way indicative then the tourists are going to be in for a dreadful night.

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,995
    First like Arsenal.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,337
    SKS fans please explain
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,265
    There aren't that many marginals in London these days, because of previous higher than average swings to Labour in the capital.
  • TazTaz Posts: 13,432
    tlg86 said:

    First like Arsenal.

    Newcastle !!
  • Greg Hands to lose his seat?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    Tourists? What will they care about the state of local government in London? :D
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    Cracking start by Hampshire in the Championship. My tip for top three again, but probably won't win. Good bowling attack though. Not expecting many draws.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,265
    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411
    I thought Rishi, who’s brilliant, was turning it all around ?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,607
    edited April 2023
    Afternoon all 😀

    The last London only poll I recall was Survation in the last days of the Trussite Period when great beasts like the Kwartengodon still walked the earth.

    Without checking I think it showed a London lead for Labour in the mid-30s but it had a very large sample for a poll.

    The YouGov is a 12% swing from the last GE.

    The good news is the LDs would hold their three seats even with that electoral tsunami.

    It compares with the 18% England swing in Monday’s Redfield & Wilton.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411
    This is a potential curve ball which might harm Biden’ re-election chances,
    https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/first-read/manchins-presidential-flirtation-raises-big-2024-questions-rcna77875

    He cannot be serious ?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 16,405
    12 percent swing devours a 24 percent lead, so that's it for everyone up to Greg Hands on this list;

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Conservative_Party_MPs_in_London

    And the six survivors are nearly all in the sort of places that say "Kent/Essex, actually". Sometimes quite aggressively.

    How do the people of Pinner feel about their Londonness?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,749
    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411
    Covid still kills the old.

    The death rate for Covid still markedly exceeds that of flu for hospitalized patients with either virus (6% vs 3.75%), as seen among people age 65+, and is higher among unvaccinated, in the @DeptVetAffairs dataset..
    https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1643993099616804864

    If you’re sick enough to be hospitalised, vaccination improves your chances, but not all that much. Of course the vaccinated are a lot less likely to be hospitalised, too.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,019
    Scott_xP said:

    SKS fans please explain

    BJO please explain
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,019
    Depeche Mode play their new single with the BBC Concert Orchestra:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jD9e_nZ4y_c
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411
    Perhaps he could run as RFK Jr.’s VP ?

    Ron Johnson tells Maria Bartiromo that his priority as a US senator right now is "advocating for the vaccine injured"
    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1643981076069744645
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    Sell of Buckingham Palace and give the proceeds to anyone who can show descent from someone affected?
  • MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    Nigelb said:

    Covid still kills the old.

    The death rate for Covid still markedly exceeds that of flu for hospitalized patients with either virus (6% vs 3.75%), as seen among people age 65+, and is higher among unvaccinated, in the @DeptVetAffairs dataset..
    https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1643993099616804864

    If you’re sick enough to be hospitalised, vaccination improves your chances, but not all that much. Of course the vaccinated are a lot less likely to be hospitalised, too.

    Yes. I think Covid is rapidly becoming the disease that takes the elderly and infirm (traditionally the role of pneumonia). To a cynic its doing the nation a favour - culling those who are elderly and infirm, although to the people involved thats a horrible thing to say.

    In related news we lost one of our cats on monday. Twenty years old, up till last week he was old but still himself - eating well, enjoying going outside. Sudden deterioration over the weekend, put to sleep on Monday.

    That we all had such an experience - a full happy life and taken swiftly at the end.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 21,749

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    I think Charles will make an excellent job of this, probably far better than EII would have.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,726
    The Conservatives are polling about the same as in the run up to the 2019 local elections. Labour are polling about 14% better.

    The Lib Dems are polling about the same. The polls were very volatile, and The Brexit Party were polling strongly. The latter translated into a a very big vote for independents, residents, local parties in the local elections. I suspect the latter will fall back heavily, to the benefit of the big parties.
  • Entirely off-topic but interesting:
    Tomorrow's World unveils the exciting new future which is digital audio. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPD1IKC3myA

    Imagine if we had someone like Judith Hann today doing an excited telly review of AI!
  • FossFoss Posts: 879
    It looks like Berlusconi's in for leukaemia and related lung issues.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,019
    Foss said:

    It looks like Berlusconi's in for leukaemia and related lung issues.

    Must be all the Lunga-Lunga parties.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,990
    edited April 2023

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    Survival of the monarchy requires a base of loyal support which is maintained more or less whatever they do, most of which is not especially woke, + it needs the acceptance of the groups who are more or less indifferent but would exercise mighty power to limit it, or abolish it, if monarchy drifted too far from progressive opinion.

    The slavery thing is undeniably a fact; it is impossible that the monarchy is not massively implicated - as is all power and wealth during the relevant period - and so it is sensible to take some action - as the Church of England has done.

    ER II possessed a magic immunity because of reasons of being around for ever and never saying anything. Charles doesn't. The immunity is not coming back in our time.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,848
    edited April 2023
    FPT: Here's some data on egg prices from this part of the US (Seattle suburbs): The most common egg packages now sell for $3.39 for a dozen large eggs. (That has been true for several months now, so I have tentatively concluded that the Kroger stores where I do most of my shopping have decided to stay at that price, to keep consumer complaints at an acceptable level. I don't know whether that price is profitable for them, but suspect that it was not, but may be, now. Before COVID, and bird flu, the most common price was $1.99 a dozen, with specials from time to time, at $.99 a dozen.)

    I expect egg prices to go down, a little, as the flocks recover from the bird flu. (Farmers may start vaccinating their birds, soon, I've read.)

    Cage free eggs sell for more, as they have for years. Since I don't buy them, I can't give you a price, but I think the prices are at least a dollar more per dozen. (It occurs to me that the supermarkets may want a fairly large difference, since few buyers will feel very virtuous if they are paying only a few pennies more per cage-free egg.)

    There are substantial variations in US egg prices by area, but, as far as I know, my experience is fairly typical.

    (The price of chicken has come down. I often see specials as low as .$99 a pound for drumsticks and thighs, and sometimes $1.29 a pound for whole chickens. Those prices dropping earlier than for eggs makes sense, since it takes longer to raise layers than chickens for meat.)
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited April 2023
    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,914
    London being so dominantly Labour is one of those things that seems like it has been around forever, yet from the chart it really has not. It's like 'senile old codgers vote Tory and young idiots vote Labour' - sure, there might have been some trends, but the intensity of the current imbalance is rather recent.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,452
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    I think Charles will make an excellent job of this, probably far better than EII would have.
    But apparently it's impossible to make an excellent job of this slavery business according to many on PB.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,914
    edited April 2023

    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
    I have some comfort for Rishi - in about 10-12 years when people are looking at the prospect of another Tory government they will look back at his 18-24 month tenure and declare 'He was ok'.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
    I have some comfort for Rishi - in about 10-12 years when people are looking at the prospect of another Tory government they will look back at his 18-24 month tenure and declare 'He was ok'.
    Plus he's so rich it doesn't matter if he loses every Tory seat,,,
  • sladeslade Posts: 1,986
    Another startling local candidate change - Luton is Con 43 to 15. Lib Dems 19 to 33.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 26,977

    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
    I have some comfort for Rishi - in about 10-12 years when people are looking at the prospect of another Tory government they will look back at his 18-24 month tenure and declare 'He was ok'.
    Plus he's so rich it doesn't matter if he loses every Tory seat,,,
    Rishi will still have his photo on the Downing Street staircase, next to Liz Truss.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    I think Charles will make an excellent job of this, probably far better than EII would have.
    But apparently it's impossible to make an excellent job of this slavery business according to many on PB.
    Bit simplistic. There are lots of issues around the idea of reparations for slavery. Who, how much are just the start. Then there is why is the caribbean slave trade different from other slavery? How far back does one go? Do we go after tribal leaders in Africa who sold slaves to the Europeans?

    Its not a simple question.

    No issues at all with increasing education about the issues. That could have been done with Colston in Bristol. History is complex. People bought and sold slaves. It was legal at the time. We do not regard that as fitting our moral compass now. In 100 years we may regard eating meat as abhorrent (some already do). Will we tear down statues of people who ate meat?*

    *Probably.
  • kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
    I have some comfort for Rishi - in about 10-12 years when people are looking at the prospect of another Tory government they will look back at his 18-24 month tenure and declare 'He was ok'.
    Plus he's so rich it doesn't matter if he loses every Tory seat,,,
    Rishi will still have his photo on the Downing Street staircase, next to Liz Truss.
    Next to Sir Keir too?
  • Sean_F said:

    The Conservatives are polling about the same as in the run up to the 2019 local elections. Labour are polling about 14% better.

    The Lib Dems are polling about the same. The polls were very volatile, and The Brexit Party were polling strongly. The latter translated into a a very big vote for independents, residents, local parties in the local elections. I suspect the latter will fall back heavily, to the benefit of the big parties.

    We can compare polls from the same polling companies March/April 23 to March/April 19.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2019_United_Kingdom_general_election

    YouGov 30.3.23 C26 L46 LD9 G7 R7
    YouGov 3.4.19 C32 L31 LD12 G4 B/UK12

    Opinion 31.3.23 C29 L44 LD9 G5 R7
    Opinion 29.3.19 C35 L35 LD9 G5 B/UK9

    Deltapoll 3.4.23 C27 L48 LD9 G4 R5
    Deltapoll 30.3.19 C36 L40 LD7 G3 B/UK7

    Savanta 2.4.23 C29 L45 LD10 G3 R5
    ComRes 7.4.19 C32 L32 LD7 G3 B/UK9 CUK9

    (Savanta acquired ComRes in the past 4 years).

    So on average since 2019 C -6 L +11 LD +0.5 G +1 R-3

    Quite a bit of volatility though.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,077
    edited April 2023
    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing propaganda.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not ALL the public.

    I now want a labour government. If nothing else its their 'turn'. But the Tories are still polling around 30%, so your statement does not represent everyone.

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,726

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    I think Charles will make an excellent job of this, probably far better than EII would have.
    But apparently it's impossible to make an excellent job of this slavery business according to many on PB.
    Bit simplistic. There are lots of issues around the idea of reparations for slavery. Who, how much are just the start. Then there is why is the caribbean slave trade different from other slavery? How far back does one go? Do we go after tribal leaders in Africa who sold slaves to the Europeans?

    Its not a simple question.

    No issues at all with increasing education about the issues. That could have been done with Colston in Bristol. History is complex. People bought and sold slaves. It was legal at the time. We do not regard that as fitting our moral compass now. In 100 years we may regard eating meat as abhorrent (some already do). Will we tear down statues of people who ate meat?*

    *Probably.
    Sean Gabb traced his own ancestry to a family of really shitty landowners. One of them seduced his great-grandmother, a maid, and the family kicked her out when she got pregnant. He did raise the point, did he inherit oppressor status, or victim status, as a result?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,726

    Sean_F said:

    The Conservatives are polling about the same as in the run up to the 2019 local elections. Labour are polling about 14% better.

    The Lib Dems are polling about the same. The polls were very volatile, and The Brexit Party were polling strongly. The latter translated into a a very big vote for independents, residents, local parties in the local elections. I suspect the latter will fall back heavily, to the benefit of the big parties.

    We can compare polls from the same polling companies March/April 23 to March/April 19.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2019_United_Kingdom_general_election

    YouGov 30.3.23 C26 L46 LD9 G7 R7
    YouGov 3.4.19 C32 L31 LD12 G4 B/UK12

    Opinion 31.3.23 C29 L44 LD9 G5 R7
    Opinion 29.3.19 C35 L35 LD9 G5 B/UK9

    Deltapoll 3.4.23 C27 L48 LD9 G4 R5
    Deltapoll 30.3.19 C36 L40 LD7 G3 B/UK7

    Savanta 2.4.23 C29 L45 LD10 G3 R5
    ComRes 7.4.19 C32 L32 LD7 G3 B/UK9 CUK9

    (Savanta acquired ComRes in the past 4 years).

    So on average since 2019 C -6 L +11 LD +0.5 G +1 R-3

    Quite a bit of volatility though.
    Conservative support, as measured by the polls, really fell sharply through April 2019, though.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,726
    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not the public.
  • mickydroymickydroy Posts: 316

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing propaganda.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not ALL the public.

    I now want a labour government. If nothing else its their 'turn'. But the Tories are still polling around 30%, so your statement does not represent everyone.

    I hope Heathener is right, but there is still a while to go yet, and the right wing media have not even started on their vitriolic attacks on Starmer and the labour party, and they will, let's see what that does to the polls, also these are just opinion polls, a real set of elections are happening in May, I think I will reserve judgement until we see those results.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,757
    mickydroy said:

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing propaganda.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not ALL the public.

    I now want a labour government. If nothing else its their 'turn'. But the Tories are still polling around 30%, so your statement does not represent everyone.

    I hope Heathener is right, but there is still a while to go yet, and the right wing media have not even started on their vitriolic attacks on Starmer and the labour party, and they will, let's see what that does to the polls, also these are just opinion polls, a real set of elections are happening in May, I think I will reserve judgement until we see those results.
    Heathener is competing to be the new rogerdamus
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,689
    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not the public.
    I believe Heathener is accurately reporting the views of people who have expressed a political opinion to Heathener.

    Mostly because if I knew Heathener and had a different political opinion, I wouldn't be so rash as to mention it to Heathener.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411

    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
    I have some comfort for Rishi - in about 10-12 years when people are looking at the prospect of another Tory government they will look back at his 18-24 month tenure and declare 'He was ok'.
    Plus he's so rich it doesn't matter if he loses every Tory seat,,,
    Rishi will still have his photo on the Downing Street staircase, next to Liz Truss.
    The rate Tories get through PMs, we need a Labour government, or an extra storey on No10 just for the photos - and we know how shit the current lot are at getting stuff through planning.00
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    Driver said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not the public.
    I believe Heathener is accurately reporting the views of people who have expressed a political opinion to Heathener.

    Mostly because if I knew Heathener and had a different political opinion, I wouldn't be so rash as to mention it to Heathener.
    Herself, in the mirror? While pouring 10 ml of boiled water into a thermos?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411
    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not the public.
    Plenty (you too ?) were happy to proclaim that the "British people have spoken" over Brexit, on a much slimmer margin.

    So your objection lacks force.

    OTOH, I'm not all that confident about the collective intelligence of the public.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834
    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not the public.
    Plenty (you too ?) were happy to proclaim that the "British people have spoken" over Brexit, on a much slimmer margin.

    So your objection lacks force.

    OTOH, I'm not all that confident about the collective intelligence of the public.
    Well quite. See also Brexit...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411
    Lithuania's parliament adopts resolution inviting Ukraine to NATO
    https://mobile.twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1644006801254350848
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 51,574

    kle4 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
    I have some comfort for Rishi - in about 10-12 years when people are looking at the prospect of another Tory government they will look back at his 18-24 month tenure and declare 'He was ok'.
    Plus he's so rich it doesn't matter if he loses every Tory seat,,,
    Well, depends on his spread betting position. Good way to lose richness.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,055
    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not the public.
    Plenty (you too ?) were happy to proclaim that the "British people have spoken" over Brexit, on a much slimmer margin.

    So your objection lacks force.

    OTOH, I'm not all that confident about the collective intelligence of the public.
    Fairly obvious the post referred to the public collectively rather than every single member of the public being of the same mind. Doubt anyone would have picked up 80%+ of posters on here if they had used the same terminology.

    And the public (collectively) have had enough. Less than 2 years and counting.
  • OK so YouTube just served up an advert for the Mormons. It was cool!
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    As a public service to PB here are some Scottish expressions with relevant emoticon which may be relevant to the current state of the SNP;


  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 16,405
    edited April 2023

    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not the public.
    Plenty (you too ?) were happy to proclaim that the "British people have spoken" over Brexit, on a much slimmer margin.

    So your objection lacks force.

    OTOH, I'm not all that confident about the collective intelligence of the public.
    Fairly obvious the post referred to the public collectively rather than every single member of the public being of the same mind. Doubt anyone would have picked up 80%+ of posters on here if they had used the same terminology.

    And the public (collectively) have had enough. Less than 2 years and counting.
    Sunak has hauled back about half the damage done by the Trussterfuck, and that's worth having for the Conservatives. But all it does is turn disaster into quite a bad defeat.

    And whilst there isn't the same fury there was this time last year, at the peak of Partygate, it seems to have largely been replaced by a complete lack of interest in what Conservatives say. Most of it won't happen, so who cares?
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,689

    Nigelb said:

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    You are not the public.
    Plenty (you too ?) were happy to proclaim that the "British people have spoken" over Brexit, on a much slimmer margin.

    So your objection lacks force.

    OTOH, I'm not all that confident about the collective intelligence of the public.
    Fairly obvious the post referred to the public collectively rather than every single member of the public being of the same mind. Doubt anyone would have picked up 80%+ of posters on here if they had used the same terminology.

    And the public (collectively) have had enough. Less than 2 years and counting.
    Sunak has hauled back about half the damage done by the Trussterfuck, and that's worth having for the Conservatives. But all it does is turn disaster into quite a bad defeat.

    And whilst there isn't the same fury there was this time last year, at the peak of Partygate, it seems to have largely been replaced by a complete lack of interest in what Conservatives say. Most of it won't happen, so who cares?
    tbf, as long as Sir Keir is so uninspiring then boring people into not really caring about voting either way is probably Sunak's best way of minimising the defeat.
  • As a public service to PB here are some Scottish expressions with relevant emoticon which may be relevant to the current state of the SNP;


    Interesting blog from Robin McAlpine:

    https://robinmcalpine.org/how-bad-is-this/

    He thinks Forbes will be SNP leader by Christmas
  • slade said:

    Another startling local candidate change - Luton is Con 43 to 15. Lib Dems 19 to 33.

    Here in Bracknell Forest, it looks like Lab and LDs have teamed up as they are not standing anywhere against each other. Lab are only standing in Bracknell Town and the LDs are only standing in the rest of the borough
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,618
    edited April 2023

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    I think Charles will make an excellent job of this, probably far better than EII would have.
    But apparently it's impossible to make an excellent job of this slavery business according to many on PB.
    Bit simplistic. There are lots of issues around the idea of reparations for slavery. Who, how much are just the start. Then there is why is the caribbean slave trade different from other slavery? How far back does one go? Do we go after tribal leaders in Africa who sold slaves to the Europeans?

    Its not a simple question.

    No issues at all with increasing education about the issues. That could have been done with Colston in Bristol. History is complex. People bought and sold slaves. It was legal at the time. We do not regard that as fitting our moral compass now. In 100 years we may regard eating meat as abhorrent (some already do). Will we tear down statues of people who ate meat?*

    *Probably.
    Don't forget that KC3 isn't just our King, but also the HoS of a number of Carribean countries. I wouldn't take the whataboutary of slaves in Ancient Rome to those Islands and expect a sympathetic ear. Neither would I take it to the former slave exporting Commonwealth countries of Africa.

    This penitance isn't just for a domestic audience.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,618

    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
    Isn't it in part a ceiling effect? It is easier to get a big swing to Labour from 30% than from 50%.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,141
    edited April 2023
    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,265

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,265

    Entirely off-topic but interesting:
    Tomorrow's World unveils the exciting new future which is digital audio. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPD1IKC3myA

    Imagine if we had someone like Judith Hann today doing an excited telly review of AI!

    Interesting video. Bad timing though because the compact disc was released later the same year.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,055

    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    You’ve forgotten NewLabour then, whom I found intolerably authoritarian.

    In practice, it’s the Tories who have ended up being weaker than whale piss on crime. Your chances of being tried and convicted of pretty much anything are at an all time low.
    Tories are strong on creating endless new laws. Very weak on enforcing them as that involves money, time and effort.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,459
    edited April 2023
    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    Unusual and destined for failure. The Cons are the nasty party no matter the immigration mugs, the british jobs for british workers, and now the lock 'em up rhetoric.

    See also - Cons could pledge to abolish the RAF and Lab could pledge to sell the NHS to Crispin Odey and they would still be seen as protectors of the armed forces and the NHS respectively.

    Edit: plus of course the most notable recent non lock up of a sexual offender was in Scottishland.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 27,525
    edited April 2023
    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    I think Charles will make an excellent job of this, probably far better than EII would have.
    But apparently it's impossible to make an excellent job of this slavery business according to many on PB.
    Bit simplistic. There are lots of issues around the idea of reparations for slavery. Who, how much are just the start. Then there is why is the caribbean slave trade different from other slavery? How far back does one go? Do we go after tribal leaders in Africa who sold slaves to the Europeans?

    Its not a simple question.

    No issues at all with increasing education about the issues. That could have been done with Colston in Bristol. History is complex. People bought and sold slaves. It was legal at the time. We do not regard that as fitting our moral compass now. In 100 years we may regard eating meat as abhorrent (some already do). Will we tear down statues of people who ate meat?*

    *Probably.
    Don't forget that KC3 isn't just our King, but also the HoS of a number of Carribean countries. I wouldn't take the whataboutary of slaves in Ancient Rome to those Islands and expect a sympathetic ear. Neither would I take it to the former slave exporting Commonwealth countries of Africa.

    This penitance isn't just for a domestic audience.
    The only thing that was unique in the approach of the Western world in respect to slavery was its decision, strongly lead by Britain, to end it, something contested vigorously by other partakers in the industry, leading to massive expenditure by Britain in blood and treasure - Gordon's defeat at Khartoum etc.

    Invoking 'the Romans' seems to me a rather pathetic attempt to imply that Britain was reviving a barbaric ancient practise, rather than partaking in a trade that had been a constant in human society since records had been kept.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,618
    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    Starmer would be very happy for electoral debates to be on such topics. He has expert knowledge.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    This represents a 12% swing from GE2019 in London. 9 or 10 Tory seats would go to Labour, with the party needing around 123 altogether.

    Actually a smaller swing than the national opinion polls (GE 2019 had Labour 11.5 points behind, current polls have them about 19 points ahead on average).

    I'm not sure that's entirely comforting to Rishi, mind.
    Isn't it in part a ceiling effect? It is easier to get a big swing to Labour from 30% than from 50%.
    Yes, I'm sure it is.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,338

    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    You’ve forgotten NewLabour then, whom I found intolerably authoritarian.

    In practice, it’s the Tories who have ended up being weaker than whale piss on crime. Your chances of being tried and convicted of pretty much anything are at an all time low.
    "intolerably authoritarian"?

    In what way?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,497

    As a public service to PB here are some Scottish expressions with relevant emoticon which may be relevant to the current state of the SNP;


    Interesting blog from Robin McAlpine:

    https://robinmcalpine.org/how-bad-is-this/

    He thinks Forbes will be SNP leader by Christmas
    He thinks that things are actually worse than they look?

    Bloody hell.

    I'm starting to think even @malcolmg has been underplaying it.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,141
    edited April 2023
    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,265
    edited April 2023

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited April 2023



    Interesting blog from Robin McAlpine:

    https://robinmcalpine.org/how-bad-is-this/

    He thinks Forbes will be SNP leader by Christmas

    Yes, it is an interesting piece.

    This bit jumped out the page, but for legal reasons we shouldn't speculate as to what he might be driving at...

    As a PR guy, where I’d be looking first if I was trying to find the biggest next bear traps is SNP HQ complaints procedure, how it was operated and whether there are serious incidents which were suppressed for political reasons.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,141
    Andy_JS said:

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
    I’m in favour of the green belts.
    I’m also in favour of proper densification, which Britain doesn’t really do.

    You can have two of:

    1. Green belt / countryside preservation
    2. Low rise cities
    3. Unaffordable housing

    Britain chooses 1 and 2.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,497

    Andy_JS said:

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
    I’m in favour of the green belts.
    I’m also in favour of proper densification, which Britain doesn’t really do.

    You can have two of:

    1. Green belt / countryside preservation
    2. Low rise cities
    3. Unaffordable housing

    Britain chooses 1 and 2.
    Do you mean 'affordable housing?' Because 1 and 2 surely lead to three in a country as densely populated as ours.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 16,405
    edited April 2023
    TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    Unusual and destined for failure. The Cons are the nasty party no matter the immigration mugs, the british jobs for british workers, and now the lock 'em up rhetoric.

    See also - Cons could pledge to abolish the RAF and Lab could pledge to sell the NHS to Crispin Odey and they would still be seen as protectors of the armed forces and the NHS respectively.

    Edit: plus of course the most notable recent non lock up of a sexual offender was in Scottishland.
    It gets to the heart of an awkward problem for any political party right now.

    It emphatically isn't the case that all government spending is good, or that the capacity to support it is infinite.

    But the public sector has had over a decade of trying to do more with less, and the capacity for efficiency savings has pretty much run dry. Yes, we're paying more tax; google "dependency ratio" if you are puzzled as to what's going on.

    There are lots of areas where the government's rhetoric simply can't happen, because of a lack of spondulicks. And that is in part becuase of the way of government went about rebalancing its budget from 2010. And continues to do so.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,141

    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    You’ve forgotten NewLabour then, whom I found intolerably authoritarian.

    In practice, it’s the Tories who have ended up being weaker than whale piss on crime. Your chances of being tried and convicted of pretty much anything are at an all time low.
    "intolerably authoritarian"?

    In what way?
    Attempted to bring in 90 days imprisonment without trial. Attempted to bring in ID cards. Basically, all of the anti-terror stuff and much of the anti-asylum rhetoric too.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Fighting dirt with dirt.
    Braverman effectively said the same about Labour.

    Doesn't excuse it, though. And stooping anywhere near Braverman's level is not a good look.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,607
    Late afternoon all 😀

    2019 saw a very mixed picture and national polling may be too crude a device to build a picture of what might happen next month. What we saw last time these seats were contested was, particularly in parts of the south, an anti-party vote so various shades of Independent, Residents and local anti-large scale high density development groups do very well.

    Both the LDs and Greens, often but not always in a tacit electoral pact, prospered and the victims in parts of the south were the Conservatives. However, the Conservatives were aided by the unpopularity of Corbyn’s Labour so results in the north and midlands weren’t too bad and the Tories also prospered in the south where the opposition was weak and/or disorganised.

    This time, Labour appears much stronger and will be seeking significant gains across the country from north to south.

    As a case study, the Conservatives control Dudley with a majority of 20 (46-26). The 24 seats up for grabs this time split 13 CON and 11 LAB in 2019. The split in terms of votes was Conservative 40%, Labour 33%.

    For Labour to gain control of Dudley they would need to win 22 of the 24 seats on offer which means picking up 11 of the 13 Conservative seats which looks a tall order - I could see them winning seven which would put the party in a good position for the 2024 round.

    In Walsall, the 20 seats up for grabs include 13 Conservative defences. Labour needs to win 8 to take control. That looks more likely.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,141
    ydoethur said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
    I’m in favour of the green belts.
    I’m also in favour of proper densification, which Britain doesn’t really do.

    You can have two of:

    1. Green belt / countryside preservation
    2. Low rise cities
    3. Unaffordable housing

    Britain chooses 1 and 2.
    Do you mean 'affordable housing?' Because 1 and 2 surely lead to three in a country as densely populated as ours.
    Yes I meant affordable.


  • Interesting blog from Robin McAlpine:

    https://robinmcalpine.org/how-bad-is-this/

    He thinks Forbes will be SNP leader by Christmas

    Yes, it is an interesting piece.

    This bit jumped out the page, but for legal reasons we shouldn't speculate as to what he might be driving at...

    As a PR guy, where I’d be looking first if I was trying to find the biggest next bear traps is SNP HQ complaints procedure, how it was operated and whether there are serious incidents which were suppressed for political reasons.
    I asked on an earlier thread what reportage there had been on the raid at HQ. Because away from the smirk factor of the Uddingston raid, that is where the real damage to the party could be.

    Yousless is continuity nippie. So he has shackled himself to the ship as it sinks under the scandal. Forbes as leader of the internal opposition inherits whatever is left.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,914
    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    I think Charles will make an excellent job of this, probably far better than EII would have.
    But apparently it's impossible to make an excellent job of this slavery business according to many on PB.
    Bit simplistic. There are lots of issues around the idea of reparations for slavery. Who, how much are just the start. Then there is why is the caribbean slave trade different from other slavery? How far back does one go? Do we go after tribal leaders in Africa who sold slaves to the Europeans?

    Its not a simple question.

    No issues at all with increasing education about the issues. That could have been done with Colston in Bristol. History is complex. People bought and sold slaves. It was legal at the time. We do not regard that as fitting our moral compass now. In 100 years we may regard eating meat as abhorrent (some already do). Will we tear down statues of people who ate meat?*

    *Probably.
    Don't forget that KC3 isn't just our King, but also the HoS of a number of Carribean countries. I wouldn't take the whataboutary of slaves in Ancient Rome to those Islands and expect a sympathetic ear. Neither would I take it to the former slave exporting Commonwealth countries of Africa.

    This penitance isn't just for a domestic audience.
    We've been assured many times that all the Caribbean countries will be going republican. Most have had plans for such for a long time.

    Not saying the penitance might not still be for more than a domestic audience, but I imagine King Sausage Fingers is pretty realistic about how long he will be head of state in any part of the Caribbean.
  • Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    I'm impressed.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,914
    edited April 2023
    Nigelb said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Fighting dirt with dirt.
    Braverman effectively said the same about Labour.

    Doesn't excuse it, though. And stooping anywhere near Braverman's level is not a good look.
    As the saying goes if you descend into a pile of shit for a fight you'll both end up covered.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,618

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm.

    Buckingham Palace has said that it is co-operating with an independent study exploring the relationship between the British monarchy and the slave trade in the 17th and 18th centuries.

    The Palace said King Charles takes the issue "profoundly seriously".


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65200570

    The wokeness of Charles and William is great for the monarchy.

    Staunch supporters of the monarchy love wokeism.
    I think Charles will make an excellent job of this, probably far better than EII would have.
    But apparently it's impossible to make an excellent job of this slavery business according to many on PB.
    Bit simplistic. There are lots of issues around the idea of reparations for slavery. Who, how much are just the start. Then there is why is the caribbean slave trade different from other slavery? How far back does one go? Do we go after tribal leaders in Africa who sold slaves to the Europeans?

    Its not a simple question.

    No issues at all with increasing education about the issues. That could have been done with Colston in Bristol. History is complex. People bought and sold slaves. It was legal at the time. We do not regard that as fitting our moral compass now. In 100 years we may regard eating meat as abhorrent (some already do). Will we tear down statues of people who ate meat?*

    *Probably.
    Don't forget that KC3 isn't just our King, but also the HoS of a number of Carribean countries. I wouldn't take the whataboutary of slaves in Ancient Rome to those Islands and expect a sympathetic ear. Neither would I take it to the former slave exporting Commonwealth countries of Africa.

    This penitance isn't just for a domestic audience.
    The only thing that was unique in the approach of the Western world in respect to slavery was its decision, strongly lead by Britain, to end it, something contested vigorously by other partakers in the industry, leading to massive expenditure by Britain in blood and treasure - Gordon's defeat at Khartoum etc.

    Invoking 'the Romans' seems to me a rather pathetic attempt to imply that Britain was reviving
    a barbaric ancient practise, rather than partaking in a trade that had been a constant in human society since records had been kept.
    Yes, there is a great quote on the subject from the Scholar and first Prime Minister of independent Trinidad and Tobago:

    "The British historians wrote almost as if Britain had introduced Negro slavery solely for the satisfaction of abolishing it"

    As a matter of interest several West African states have made public apologies for their role in the transatlantic slave trade:

    https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2000-05-01-0005010158-story.html

    https://www.modernghana.com/news/102692/ghana-apologizes-to-slaves-descendants.html

    Ghana also has in interesting right of return policy to the African diaspora by means of apology.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,055
    Andy_JS said:

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
    I'm in favour of the concept of green belts. I don't think that is inconsistent with releasing say 1% of the green belt when our population has increased by almost 20% since the early nineties. The green belt area chosen in the early nineties should be respected but not sacrosanct forever regardless of circumstance.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 51,574

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    The obvious bear-trap is the retort "Starmer didn't prosecute Savile"....
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,990
    Heathener said:

    For every single one of you betting on the next General Election you need to cut out and stick this paragraph on your wall, your desk, your front door, your wallet ... anywhere that will tempt you to stop thinking otherwise:

    "My view is that the public has decided that the time for the Tory government is up and to let somebody else have a chance. In certain seats it will be the Labour Party that benefits most as being the force most likely to beat the Conservative. In a range of other seats the Lib Dems are going to do particularly well." @MikeSmithson

    Mike is right. The sea change has already taken place and nothing now is going to reverse it. The Conservatives are going to get pummelled and they are only making things worse for themselves by a blatantly obvious series of revolting right-wing policies.

    The public aren't stupid and we've had enough.

    Probably right. Currently Labour win and Tories lose. No doubt.

    But circumstances could (10%-20% chance?) so conspire that 'morally' they both lose ie, most people are against them both for reasons. It only takes Abbott, Pidcock and Burgon to try harder. Or some other Black Swan.

    At which point one of the losers has to be on top. Since all politics is relative. It could be the Tories, as they currently hold the seats. If Labour blow it, the result as seen from right now would be pretty random.

    Bet accordingly. And hope Labour win

  • Andy_JS said:

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
    I’m in favour of the green belts.
    I’m also in favour of proper densification, which Britain doesn’t really do.

    You can have two of:

    1. Green belt / countryside preservation
    2. Low rise cities
    3. Unaffordable housing

    Britain chooses 1 and 2.
    We leave planning to the developers. So we get rat tip Barrett houses thrown up where they want, offering microscopic bedroom executive homes and tiny gardens where they lay turf on top of rubble.

    What we need to really push is the idea of younger people living in central apartments. Regenerate city and town centres, fit more people into a smaller space, bring shops and restaurants to life.

    Instead? Crush in homes people don't want into places with no services and watch as these new estates slowly corrode into petty crime and vandalism hotspots.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,198
    kle4 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Fighting dirt with dirt.
    Braverman effectively said the same about Labour.

    Doesn't excuse it, though. And stooping anywhere near Braverman's level is not a good look.
    As the saying goes if you descend into a pile of shit for a fight you'll both end up covered.
    My favourite variation: If you touch shit with gloves on, the gloves get shittier. The shit doesn't get any glovier.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821

    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    You’ve forgotten NewLabour then, whom I found intolerably authoritarian.

    In practice, it’s the Tories who have ended up being weaker than whale piss on crime. Your chances of being tried and convicted of pretty much anything are at an all time low.
    "intolerably authoritarian"?

    In what way?
    Attempted to bring in 90 days imprisonment without trial. Attempted to bring in ID cards. Basically, all of the anti-terror stuff and much of the anti-asylum rhetoric too.
    There are plenty more - see the long Twitter thread here:

    https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/1231543272943898626
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,990

    Andy_JS said:

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
    I’m in favour of the green belts.
    I’m also in favour of proper densification, which Britain doesn’t really do.

    You can have two of:

    1. Green belt / countryside preservation
    2. Low rise cities
    3. Unaffordable housing

    Britain chooses 1 and 2.
    I think we have all three. Typo somewhere?

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,411

    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    You’ve forgotten NewLabour then, whom I found intolerably authoritarian.

    In practice, it’s the Tories who have ended up being weaker than whale piss on crime. Your chances of being tried and convicted of pretty much anything are at an all time low.
    Plenty of hard line legislation from them.
    Their actual administration of law enforcement and criminal justice has been pathetic.

    Frankly no one who’s been in government for several decades now has much to be proud about when it comes to dealing with child abuse.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 41,293
    If Labour want to lock up dangerous child abusers, will they call Tom Watson to do the job? In which case, expect anyone who has ever voted Conservative to be locked up, whilst Labour kiddie-fiddlers go free. ;)
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,559
    edited April 2023
    Re the advert. The prisons are full to.overflowing with people who have been locked up. The libertarians want fewer sent to prison. The reality is we need more prisons. .
    ydoethur said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
    I’m in favour of the green belts.
    I’m also in favour of proper densification, which Britain doesn’t really do.

    You can have two of:

    1. Green belt / countryside preservation
    2. Low rise cities
    3. Unaffordable housing

    Britain chooses 1 and 2.
    Do you mean 'affordable housing?' Because 1 and 2 surely lead to three in a country as densely populated as ours.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 16,834

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    How many were 17 year old boys with 15 year old girlfriends? Seems an odd stat.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,141

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    The obvious bear-trap is the retort "Starmer didn't prosecute Savile"....
    The Tories have already tried that one, and most people just felt sickened that they should sink so low.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,497

    Re the advert. The prisons are full to.pverflowing with people who have been. Locked up. The libertarians want fewer sent to prison. The reality is we need mote prosons.

    ydoethur said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Analysts believe that the UK should be building *at least* 300k houses a year, and some suggest we need as many as *600k a year* to make up the gap with other countries.

    Tory planning proposals are expected to reduce current build rates to 156k a year, according to analysis from Lichfields.

    https://twitter.com/paul_slg/status/1635720805987254289?s=46&t=L9g_woCIqbo1MTuBFCK0xg

    It wasn't that long ago that most people, whether on the left or right, were strongly in favour of preserving the green belts, because otherwise towns and cities would simply blend into each other, like they already have in some parts of the south-east.
    I’m in favour of the green belts.
    I’m also in favour of proper densification, which Britain doesn’t really do.

    You can have two of:

    1. Green belt / countryside preservation
    2. Low rise cities
    3. Unaffordable housing

    Britain chooses 1 and 2.
    Do you mean 'affordable housing?' Because 1 and 2 surely lead to three in a country as densely populated as ours.
    Either there is a bizarre non-sequitur caused by a Vanilla malfunction here, or you have just suggested the solution to the affordable housing crisis is to build more prisons and lock people up in them.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,141

    Andy_JS said:

    Labour fighting dirty. Personally I think this goes too far, albeit the Tories at large have largely got away so far with destroying the criminal justice system and attempted to scapegoat various elements.


    Unusual for Labour to try to be tougher than the Tories on crime.
    You’ve forgotten NewLabour then, whom I found intolerably authoritarian.

    In practice, it’s the Tories who have ended up being weaker than whale piss on crime. Your chances of being tried and convicted of pretty much anything are at an all time low.
    "intolerably authoritarian"?

    In what way?
    Attempted to bring in 90 days imprisonment without trial. Attempted to bring in ID cards. Basically, all of the anti-terror stuff and much of the anti-asylum rhetoric too.
    There are plenty more - see the long Twitter thread here:

    https://twitter.com/joncstone/status/1231543272943898626
    That’s a rather silly list. I agree with half the things the twitterer is castigating.
This discussion has been closed.