Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

There is nothing to Keir but Keir itself – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,700
edited April 2023 in General
There is nothing to Keir but Keir itself – politicalbetting.com

NEW from @IpsosUK /@standardnews. Labour lead at +23. Changes from Feb.– Labour 49% (-2) – Conservative 26% (+1) – Lib Dems 11% (+2)– Greens 6% (+1) – Other 8% (-1)1,004 GB telephone interviews March 22-29So no change. BUT there is ALOT more going on ?

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,338
    This is probably little more than exposure. The tories have been making all the news and Sunak is doing a reasonably competent job of steadying the ship.

    When the GE comes and media coverage is equitable I expect Starmer's personal ratings to rise. People will get to see him, hear him, know him more. Someone close to me had a cup of tea and chat with him with a group of friends and said he was funny and easy to get along with.

    The second, actually more important point, is that this is arguably not a 124 seat swing requirement.

    The 2019 'Get Brexit Done' general election against Corbyn was an abberation. It's a mistake to think it represents anything other than a one-off unique vote.

    The real swing is against 2017.

    Contentious? Maybe. A point? Yes.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,338
    p.s. waiting for some smart ass Oxford union type to express surprise that Starmer has a group of friends.

    Spare us.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,338
    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Good morning, everyone.

    Football: both my EPL bets failed in part to own goals. I feel the universe owes me a booby prize.
  • Options
    mickydroymickydroy Posts: 237
    Heathener said:

    This is probably little more than exposure. The tories have been making all the news and Sunak is doing a reasonably competent job of steadying the ship.

    When the GE comes and media coverage is equitable I expect Starmer's personal ratings to rise. People will get to see him, hear him, know him more. Someone close to me had a cup of tea and chat with him with a group of friends and said he was funny and easy to get along with.

    The second, actually more important point, is that this is arguably not a 124 seat swing requirement.

    The 2019 'Get Brexit Done' general election against Corbyn was an abberation. It's a mistake to think it represents anything other than a one-off unique vote.

    The real swing is against 2017.

    Contentious? Maybe. A point? Yes.

    No one is going to sway you from your belief that the Tories, are in for a hammering, I wish I could be so confident. This is the most awful government of my lifetime, with some of the worst ministers imaginable, Mogg, Dorries, Hancock, Patel, Braverman the list goes on and on, but still I have this recurring nightmare, that I wake up on some Friday morning in 2025, and they have been returned, I still believe that scenario is likelier than Labour winning by 100 seats plus
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,338
    Fair enough Micky but I think things are very different to 1992 and 2015. There has been a sea change and this feels to me like 1997. It's not just the opinion polls, it's what you hear in the streets and shops: people spitting venom about the state of things.

    On which topic, I had thought the infamous demon eyes campaign against Tony Blair was withdrawn at John Major's instruction but it seems it was in fact the Advertising Standards Authority which instructed its withdrawal?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Labour,_New_Danger

    Just bear this in mind if you hear people being sanctimonious about negative campaigning.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,338
    edited April 2023
    As for personal approval ratings, there is no direct correlation to general election results. By and large focusing solely on party leader approval leads to overly pessimistic predictions for the largest parties, and particularly for Labour.

    Leader approval ratings tend to be extremely volatile and, typically, a 10% shift for a party leader only leads to a 2% change in voting intention (at best).

    Much of it is about exposure and the real test only comes during the GE campaign itself when media coverage is supposedly equitable. Of course, it can also lead to the wrong kind of exposure such as when Theresa May was found out to be a MayBot during the disastrous 2017 campaign.

    Labour's biggest problem is, of course, dealing with the rich-owned right wing newspapers. Tony Blair solved this largely by wooing them. I don't see the same love-in from Starmer's Labour. But to counteract this, do the dead tree press have the same hold these days? Almost certainly not.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,060

    Good morning, everyone.

    Football: both my EPL bets failed in part to own goals. I feel the universe owes me a booby prize.

    The universe will be giving you Starmer, so I guess you're in luck.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,060
    Ah, just realized that my friend (and near neighbor in North London) Lucy Frazer is in the cabinet.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,358
    edited April 2023
    Heathener said:

    As for personal approval ratings, there is no direct correlation to general election results. By and large focusing solely on party leader approval leads to overly pessimistic predictions for the largest parties, and particularly for Labour.

    Leader approval ratings tend to be extremely volatile and, typically, a 10% shift for a party leader only leads to a 2% change in voting intention (at best).

    Much of it is about exposure and the real test only comes during the GE campaign itself when media coverage is supposedly equitable. Of course, it can also lead to the wrong kind of exposure such as when Theresa May was found out to be a MayBot during the disastrous 2017 campaign.

    Labour's biggest problem is, of course, dealing with the rich-owned right wing newspapers. Tony Blair solved this largely by wooing them. I don't see the same love-in from Starmer's Labour. But to counteract this, do the dead tree press have the same hold these days? Almost certainly not.

    Good morning

    The attack on labour's posters has been led by the Guardian and many of Starmers mps and even Cooper, the shadow home secretary was not made aware of them, rather than the right wing press you so frequently refer to.

    You constantly talk of annihilation of the conservatives but Sunak is beginning to be seen as a competent PM and with 18 months before the election it is too soon to forecast the actual result, but one thing is certain, Sunak will come over far better in a GE campaign than Starmer

    Hubris and over confidence often fails
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,336
    So where’s this awesome pun we were promised?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,336
    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    I agree with Helen Lewis that Starmer is “ruthless” in the sense that he is determined, focused on winning, and not sentimentally bound to factions or individuals. But to me the word implies a clarity of purpose which he does not have. Yes, he is determined to climb the mountain, but at any given moment he seems unsure of the path to the top. He kind of scrabbles around from side to side until he finds a way to get a few feet further along, and sometimes heads in the wrong direction before changing course.

    His treatment of the gender issue is typical. A ruthless leader would have worked out what he thought about it by now, steamrollered internal opposition, and scraped this particular barnacle off the boat. Instead, he has shifted towards a tenable position by salami-sliced increments while allowing senior colleagues to ignore or contradict him. It is painful to watch, and typified by his latest, excruciating statement that 99.9% of women don’t have a penis. In politics, you really have to round up.


    https://ianleslie.substack.com/p/the-tortoise
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    As some wag on the previous thread remarked “From Winnie Ewing to Winnebago”
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,927
    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,513
    rcs1000 said:

    Ah, just realized that my friend (and near neighbor in North London) Lucy Frazer is in the cabinet.

    A Cambridge-educated lawyer? I can see why pb might have censored that news.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941
    Morning all, and Happy Easter. 🐣
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The question remains “what will replace them”? I suspect Starmer is more radical than he presents himself as - which may, or may not, be a good thing.

    I think the national mood has clearly shifted to “give the other lot a go and chuck the buggers out” - with Sunak though, it may be from a second floor window, not the tenth floor that Heathener daily prays for.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    edited April 2023
    Happy Easter, mr. Sandpit (et al). Hope you have an egg or two.

    Edited extra bit: Mr. F, it's faintly ironic. Excepting the vaccine rollout and Ukraine, the Government could be attacked on almost anything. Yet Starmer/Labour managed to find something that seems unreasonable.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    And that's absolutely fair enough; but don't ever pretend that Labour have the moral high ground. After all, Labour are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing. As the McBride incident showed, it is not a new thing.

    Personally, I'd rather our politics be more reasonable than that.
    When you go negative, you need something to go negative about. There’s plenty to go negative about with this government, but Sunak being a nonce, or a friend of nonces, is not one of them.
    Least of all from the party that proposed the “Nonce Finder General (Failed)” for a peerage.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,997

    I agree with Helen Lewis that Starmer is “ruthless” in the sense that he is determined, focused on winning, and not sentimentally bound to factions or individuals. But to me the word implies a clarity of purpose which he does not have. Yes, he is determined to climb the mountain, but at any given moment he seems unsure of the path to the top. He kind of scrabbles around from side to side until he finds a way to get a few feet further along, and sometimes heads in the wrong direction before changing course.

    His treatment of the gender issue is typical. A ruthless leader would have worked out what he thought about it by now, steamrollered internal opposition, and scraped this particular barnacle off the boat. Instead, he has shifted towards a tenable position by salami-sliced increments while allowing senior colleagues to ignore or contradict him. It is painful to watch, and typified by his latest, excruciating statement that 99.9% of women don’t have a penis. In politics, you really have to round up.


    https://ianleslie.substack.com/p/the-tortoise

    That is a great article - well worth reading
  • Options
    FPT, and for @bondegezou, re the points re 2019 being a special effect due to Corbyn.

    I think the line that it was all down to Corbyn that Labour in 2019 is true but not for the way you think it is.

    The idea that the Corbyn of 2017 was an unknown entity is, frankly, rubbish. His background had been widely publicised, he was open (and radical) about what he wanted to do and - which doesn't get so mentioned - his performance was against the backdrop of two terrorist attacks to where he was extremely vulnerable of a backlash because of his support for "freedom" movements.

    When you go back and look at the seats what is very noticeable is that Corbyn stopped the rot in the Red Wall seats which should have fallen based on the trend lines over the previous 15 years. There's a reason for that. Those RW voters liked his economic policies but trusted him on Brexit.

    The difference on the 19 Corbyn? The 19 Corbyn squirmed on what Labour would do with Brexit due to the policy of...SKS. Those same voters no longer believed they could trust him on the issue (hence why his personal ratings fell).

    If there was an election that was an aberration, it was 2017, not 2019.

    The implication for now? Labour he hasn't resolved the underlying fault issues that have weakened the party for years - and Sunak risks detoxifying the Tories enough where the trend continues.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,307
    edited April 2023
    ...
    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Tories will get a comfortable majority, just like 1992. It is not just because of Sunak's sublimity and Starmer's ineptitude, but that doesn't help, but as a nation we have changed. The Conservatives have a client vote which is ostensibly comfortable with the status quo, and not enough of those suffering discomfort vote at all.

    So the gravy train rolls on. The low (and not so low) level corruption continues unabated to the point where single party government becomes inevitable. It survives through a combination of lies, both directly and via its absolute ownership of the means of propaganda, good fortune and a disengaged electorate who care not a jot that a mind so malign as Suella Braverman's runs out domestic affairs and people as absurd as Jacob Rees Mogg and Lee Anderson have the ear of the Prime Minister.

    Don't fear for the Conservative Party, it is in rude health. It just might not be the party you had hoped for or even expected.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,408

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    The trouble is, even if we accept Labour must climb into the gutter, Sunak is the wrong target because no-one believes he wants armed gangs of child molesters to roam the land. It is the same mistake the Tories made when portraying Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Labour ought to be targeting Tory sleaze and corruption, especially around PPE during the Covid pandemic with its echoes of Partygate. Voters made sacrifices while Tories were throwing billions to their dodgy mates. Voters will be swayed by that because they are already halfway there.

    Saying Labour will reduce crime is also good in itself, especially if there is some mechanism promised, such as rebuilding however many courts the Tories have closed, but the personal attacks on Rishi are likely to be unproductive or even counterproductive.

    And the fact Labour is just talking about sentencing suggests there is no serious policy there either.
    Indeed. You wonder what genius Labour strategy meeting debated all the issues that are worrying people right now, and came up with Sunak being supposedly soft on child abuse as the right one to target?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,408

    ...

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Tories will get a comfortable majority, just like 1992. It is not just because of Sunak's sublimity and Starmer's ineptitude, but that doesn't help, but as a nation we have changed. The Conservatives have a client vote which is ostensibly comfortable with the status quo, and not enough of those suffering discomfort vote at all.

    So the gravy train rolls on. The low (and not so low) level corruption continues unabated to the point where single party government becomes inevitable. It survives through a combination of lies, both directly and via its absolute ownership of the means of propaganda, good fortune and a disengaged electorate who care not a jot that a mind so malign as Suella Braverman's runs out domestic affairs and people as absurd as Jacob Rees Mogg and Lee Anderson have the ear of the Prime Minister.

    Don't fear for the Conservative Party, it is in rude health. It just might not be the party you had hoped for or even expected.
    The real test for Sunak is what sort of Conservative Party he takes to the people in '24.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,503
    Today is the 31st anniversary of the 1992 GE.
    It is also the 31st anniversary of the most memorable try I ever scored. Fast disappearing over the horizon in the rear view mirror, now, sadly, but I think it was the U18 Cheshire Cup final, probably held at Winnington Park RUFC. We lost 16-6, but I contributed four of the six with a 60 yard run in from a planned backs move from fullback, concluding with a more in-character run-in-to-the-opposing-fullback-rather-than-round-him-and-fall-over-the-line. A few drinks on the back of that - underage drinking much more tolerated in those days. Anyway, later in the evening, back to our clubhouse and my first memories of watching a GE result. I remember the early signs that Labour had not done as well as they hoped, then the Basildon result before setting off for home; by the time I got home around midnight, the next five years of Con government seemed beyond question.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,549
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    Getting more frequent swings of the pendulum rather depends on defeated parties not going off in a huff of unelectability when defeated.

    Dunno how that happens.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,307
    edited April 2023
    IanB2 said:

    ...

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Tories will get a comfortable majority, just like 1992. It is not just because of Sunak's sublimity and Starmer's ineptitude, but that doesn't help, but as a nation we have changed. The Conservatives have a client vote which is ostensibly comfortable with the status quo, and not enough of those suffering discomfort vote at all.

    So the gravy train rolls on. The low (and not so low) level corruption continues unabated to the point where single party government becomes inevitable. It survives through a combination of lies, both directly and via its absolute ownership of the means of propaganda, good fortune and a disengaged electorate who care not a jot that a mind so malign as Suella Braverman's runs out domestic affairs and people as absurd as Jacob Rees Mogg and Lee Anderson have the ear of the Prime Minister.

    Don't fear for the Conservative Party, it is in rude health. It just might not be the party you had hoped for or even expected.
    The real test for Sunak is what sort of Conservative Party he takes to the people in '24.
    I suspect it will be one that pushes all the buttons of GBNews viewers with the veneer of cheery optimism. But if the rest of us don't mind too much, is that so awful?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941
    IanB2 said:

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    The trouble is, even if we accept Labour must climb into the gutter, Sunak is the wrong target because no-one believes he wants armed gangs of child molesters to roam the land. It is the same mistake the Tories made when portraying Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Labour ought to be targeting Tory sleaze and corruption, especially around PPE during the Covid pandemic with its echoes of Partygate. Voters made sacrifices while Tories were throwing billions to their dodgy mates. Voters will be swayed by that because they are already halfway there.

    Saying Labour will reduce crime is also good in itself, especially if there is some mechanism promised, such as rebuilding however many courts the Tories have closed, but the personal attacks on Rishi are likely to be unproductive or even counterproductive.

    And the fact Labour is just talking about sentencing suggests there is no serious policy there either.
    Indeed. You wonder what genius Labour strategy meeting debated all the issues that are worrying people right now, and came up with Sunak being supposedly soft on child abuse as the right one to target?
    Where’s the positivity and the vision? 1995-era Blair had vision and positivity in spades.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941

    Sean_F said:

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    And that's absolutely fair enough; but don't ever pretend that Labour have the moral high ground. After all, Labour are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing. As the McBride incident showed, it is not a new thing.

    Personally, I'd rather our politics be more reasonable than that.
    When you go negative, you need something to go negative about. There’s plenty to go negative about with this government, but Sunak being a nonce, or a friend of nonces, is not one of them.
    Least of all from the party that proposed the “Nonce Finder General (Failed)” for a peerage.
    Led by the DPP from when the current sentencing guidelines were written.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,549
    IanB2 said:

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    The trouble is, even if we accept Labour must climb into the gutter, Sunak is the wrong target because no-one believes he wants armed gangs of child molesters to roam the land. It is the same mistake the Tories made when portraying Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Labour ought to be targeting Tory sleaze and corruption, especially around PPE during the Covid pandemic with its echoes of Partygate. Voters made sacrifices while Tories were throwing billions to their dodgy mates. Voters will be swayed by that because they are already halfway there.

    Saying Labour will reduce crime is also good in itself, especially if there is some mechanism promised, such as rebuilding however many courts the Tories have closed, but the personal attacks on Rishi are likely to be unproductive or even counterproductive.

    And the fact Labour is just talking about sentencing suggests there is no serious policy there either.
    Indeed. You wonder what genius Labour strategy meeting debated all the issues that are worrying people right now, and came up with Sunak being supposedly soft on child abuse as the right one to target?
    First off, Rishi and Sue were all over a subset of the issue like a cheap suit blowing a dog whistle earlier in the week.

    Second, if the message widens to "Tories bang on about Laura Norder, but their delivery is rubbish", it's got legs.

    Whether that's the plan remains to be seen, but it's not totally bonkers.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Ah, just realized that my friend (and near neighbor in North London) Lucy Frazer is in the cabinet.

    Another Cambridge educated lawyer on the march.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    So where’s this awesome pun we were promised?

    It is so subtle that you missed it.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_fear_but_fear_itself
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,793
    edited April 2023

    Good morning, everyone.

    Football: both my EPL bets failed in part to own goals. I feel the universe owes me a booby prize.

    As I have been pointing out for some weeks, Leicester for relegation was massive value at 5/1. Probably still some value at near evens. We are hopeless.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,252
    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    The trouble is, even if we accept Labour must climb into the gutter, Sunak is the wrong target because no-one believes he wants armed gangs of child molesters to roam the land. It is the same mistake the Tories made when portraying Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Labour ought to be targeting Tory sleaze and corruption, especially around PPE during the Covid pandemic with its echoes of Partygate. Voters made sacrifices while Tories were throwing billions to their dodgy mates. Voters will be swayed by that because they are already halfway there.

    Saying Labour will reduce crime is also good in itself, especially if there is some mechanism promised, such as rebuilding however many courts the Tories have closed, but the personal attacks on Rishi are likely to be unproductive or even counterproductive.

    And the fact Labour is just talking about sentencing suggests there is no serious policy there either.
    Indeed. You wonder what genius Labour strategy meeting debated all the issues that are worrying people right now, and came up with Sunak being supposedly soft on child abuse as the right one to target?
    Where’s the positivity and the vision? 1995-era Blair had vision and positivity in spades.
    Not that I’m persuaded by it, but Labour are positive that they’re not the Tories and they have a vision of the UK not being governed by gurning sociopaths. That’s enough to convince voters atm but who knows where the notoriously amnesiac great British public will be in a year’s time?
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,797

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    The trouble is, even if we accept Labour must climb into the gutter, Sunak is the wrong target because no-one believes he wants armed gangs of child molesters to roam the land. It is the same mistake the Tories made when portraying Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Labour ought to be targeting Tory sleaze and corruption, especially around PPE during the Covid pandemic with its echoes of Partygate. Voters made sacrifices while Tories were throwing billions to their dodgy mates. Voters will be swayed by that because they are already halfway there.

    Saying Labour will reduce crime is also good in itself, especially if there is some mechanism promised, such as rebuilding however many courts the Tories have closed, but the personal attacks on Rishi are likely to be unproductive or even counterproductive.

    And the fact Labour is just talking about sentencing suggests there is no serious policy there either.
    Yes they are just triggering an arms race which panders to a base popular instinct. It has made me quite depressed this week, but it is not surprising.

    If you follow policy in this area, it is quite predictable. Sensible justice ministers (Clarke, Gove and Rory Stewart), get switch to 'lock em up' populism , pandering to public opinion. It is the same cycle with the opposition, labour come up with interesting ideas and now we are seeing them do the same thing.

    The population at large are happy with a system where criminals are banged up for many years, in squalid conditions. Even things like death by careless driving attract popular calls for longer, tougher prison sentences. You then observe the same people driving around whilst using their mobile phones, having near misses....

    Sadly justice policy is one area where the elite need to save the people from their own worst instincts.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,534
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    I don't want Labour to have a majority.

    Labour on 300 seats and Lib Dems on 30 and the Conservatives on 275 seats would suit me. They'd have to drop the batshit and do vote by vote deals, and there'd be an even present threat of LDs/Tories combining to outvote and block Labour.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,368
    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    edited April 2023
    Dr. Foxy, super close in the bottom nine, though, eight points from 12th to 20th. There's also the Everton situation that could lead to a points deduction.

    Edited extra bit: that 5/1 would be very hedegable now, though.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,534
    Barnesian said:

    I agree with Helen Lewis that Starmer is “ruthless” in the sense that he is determined, focused on winning, and not sentimentally bound to factions or individuals. But to me the word implies a clarity of purpose which he does not have. Yes, he is determined to climb the mountain, but at any given moment he seems unsure of the path to the top. He kind of scrabbles around from side to side until he finds a way to get a few feet further along, and sometimes heads in the wrong direction before changing course.

    His treatment of the gender issue is typical. A ruthless leader would have worked out what he thought about it by now, steamrollered internal opposition, and scraped this particular barnacle off the boat. Instead, he has shifted towards a tenable position by salami-sliced increments while allowing senior colleagues to ignore or contradict him. It is painful to watch, and typified by his latest, excruciating statement that 99.9% of women don’t have a penis. In politics, you really have to round up.


    https://ianleslie.substack.com/p/the-tortoise

    That is a great article - well worth reading
    It completely sums Starmer up.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,534

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The question remains “what will replace them”? I suspect Starmer is more radical than he presents himself as - which may, or may not, be a good thing.

    I think the national mood has clearly shifted to “give the other lot a go and chuck the buggers out” - with Sunak though, it may be from a second floor window, not the tenth floor that Heathener daily prays for.
    I scrolled past all her vomit this morning.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,800

    FPT, and for @bondegezou, re the points re 2019 being a special effect due to Corbyn.

    I think the line that it was all down to Corbyn that Labour in 2019 is true but not for the way you think it is.

    The idea that the Corbyn of 2017 was an unknown entity is, frankly, rubbish. His background had been widely publicised, he was open (and radical) about what he wanted to do and - which doesn't get so mentioned - his performance was against the backdrop of two terrorist attacks to where he was extremely vulnerable of a backlash because of his support for "freedom" movements.

    When you go back and look at the seats what is very noticeable is that Corbyn stopped the rot in the Red Wall seats which should have fallen based on the trend lines over the previous 15 years. There's a reason for that. Those RW voters liked his economic policies but trusted him on Brexit.

    The difference on the 19 Corbyn? The 19 Corbyn squirmed on what Labour would do with Brexit due to the policy of...SKS. Those same voters no longer believed they could trust him on the issue (hence why his personal ratings fell).

    If there was an election that was an aberration, it was 2017, not 2019.

    The implication for now? Labour he hasn't resolved the underlying fault issues that have weakened the party for years - and Sunak risks detoxifying the Tories enough where the trend continues.

    I believe that the kids on the Internet call this “copium”. Your comments seem to have no relationship whatsoever to current polling on voting intention, Starmer’s approval ratings or Brexit/Bregret.
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,503

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    I don't want Labour to have a majority.

    Labour on 300 seats and Lib Dems on 30 and the Conservatives on 275 seats would suit me. They'd have to drop the batshit and do vote by vote deals, and there'd be an even present threat of LDs/Tories combining to outvote and block Labour.
    My fear is that, dependent on LDs and SNPs, the tendency would be to more bstshit rather than less.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,008
    edited April 2023
    I am enjoying the relief from the aura of competent government Sunak gives off. Indeed I’m quite happy for him to continue until Autumn 24. But then I will be voting for whoever can kick the Tories out. For me, the party must be punished for what they inflicted on us between 2019 and 2022.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,793
    edited April 2023

    Dr. Foxy, super close in the bottom nine, though, eight points from 12th to 20th. There's also the Everton situation that could lead to a points deduction.

    Edited extra bit: that 5/1 would be very hedegable now, though.

    Yeah, I have laid off a bit, who knows but Jesse Marsch may pull off a miracle.

    I think that our owners left it far too late to sack Rodgers. Should have gone in the summer.

    Next week is Man City away, so probably even better value to lay by next Sunday.

  • Options

    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.

    Lot of anger from Brighton this am about var favouring Spurs
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,800

    I am enjoying the relief from the aura of competent government Sunak gives off. Indeed I’m quite happy for him to continue until Autumn 24. But then I will be voting for whoever can kick the Tories out. For me, the party must be punished for what they inflicted on us between 2019 and 2022.

    But you’re OK with what they inflicted on us in 2023?

  • Options

    I am enjoying the relief from the aura of competent government Sunak gives off. Indeed I’m quite happy for him to continue until Autumn 24. But then I will be voting for whoever can kick the Tories out. For me, the party must be punished for what they inflicted on us between 2019 and 2022.

    He is welcoming Biden tomorrow to Northern Ireland to celebrate the GFA

    Lots of coverage in the media and let us all pray it will be incident free
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,793
    edited April 2023

    I am enjoying the relief the aura of competent government Sunak gives off. Indeed I’m quite happy for him to continue until Autumn 24. But then I will be voting for whoever can kick the Tories out. For me, the party must be punished for what they inflicted on us between 2019 and 2022.

    Definitely so. I dislike Starmer's Labour, and the posters were vile, and I hope they backfire on him so not repeated.

    We have had an awful choice at all recent elections with little positive to choose from at any of them.
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,008

    I am enjoying the relief from the aura of competent government Sunak gives off. Indeed I’m quite happy for him to continue until Autumn 24. But then I will be voting for whoever can kick the Tories out. For me, the party must be punished for what they inflicted on us between 2019 and 2022.

    But you’re OK with what they inflicted on us in 2023?

    It’s been OK since Truss was ditched.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Dr. Foxy, it might make you feel better to remember who was leading the parties last time round. Both are improvements on an egotistical imbecile and a far left cretin.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,800

    I am enjoying the relief from the aura of competent government Sunak gives off. Indeed I’m quite happy for him to continue until Autumn 24. But then I will be voting for whoever can kick the Tories out. For me, the party must be punished for what they inflicted on us between 2019 and 2022.

    But you’re OK with what they inflicted on us in 2023?

    It’s been OK since Truss was ditched.
    That’s only 20% of 2023!

    And I wouldn’t call the continuing cost of living crisis and collapse of public services “OK”, but that’s just a personal opinion.

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.

    Lot of anger from Brighton this am about var favouring Spurs
    Worst idea ever for football. Wrecks the games and makes more mistakes than the refs used to. Total garbage.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,519

    I am enjoying the relief from the aura of competent government Sunak gives off. Indeed I’m quite happy for him to continue until Autumn 24. But then I will be voting for whoever can kick the Tories out. For me, the party must be punished for what they inflicted on us between 2019 and 2022.

    But you’re OK with what they inflicted on us in 2023?

    It’s been OK since Truss was ditched.
    That’s only 20% of 2023!

    And I wouldn’t call the continuing cost of living crisis and collapse of public services “OK”, but that’s just a personal opinion.

    The problem for Starmer is that he doesn't have the solution for either.

    Happy Easter everyone!
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Yeah. You football fans can only dream of the silky smooth rule enforcement we enjoy in F1.
  • Options
    Morning all and just for the record I told my nearest neighbours that they were making a mistake voting for Starmer in the Labour leadership election because he would bore the English working class. With every speech he makes, that seems clearer. It is Anas Sarwar who is responsible for Labour's recovery in the polls in Scotland. He is the sort of New Labour politician that even middle of the road Scots Tories could vote for. Just to confirm Easterross will still be voting Tory as the new Caithness, Sutherland and Ross seat is looking like a cracker of an SNP/LibDem marginal and I am hoping cousin Jamie wins.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,793
    malcolmg said:

    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.

    Lot of anger from Brighton this am about var favouring Spurs
    Worst idea ever for football. Wrecks the games and makes more mistakes than the refs used to. Total garbage.
    No, people forget how poor many decisions were before VAR.

    On Tuesday, Leicester were awarded an injury time penalty against Villa, disallowed on VAR. It was the correct decision.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    The trouble is, even if we accept Labour must climb into the gutter, Sunak is the wrong target because no-one believes he wants armed gangs of child molesters to roam the land. It is the same mistake the Tories made when portraying Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Labour ought to be targeting Tory sleaze and corruption, especially around PPE during the Covid pandemic with its echoes of Partygate. Voters made sacrifices while Tories were throwing billions to their dodgy mates. Voters will be swayed by that because they are already halfway there.

    Saying Labour will reduce crime is also good in itself, especially if there is some mechanism promised, such as rebuilding however many courts the Tories have closed, but the personal attacks on Rishi are likely to be unproductive or even counterproductive.

    And the fact Labour is just talking about sentencing suggests there is no serious policy there either.
    Indeed. You wonder what genius Labour strategy meeting debated all the issues that are worrying people right now, and came up with Sunak being supposedly soft on child abuse as the right one to target?
    Where’s the positivity and the vision? 1995-era Blair had vision and positivity in spades.
    Not that I’m persuaded by it, but Labour are positive that they’re not the Tories and they have a vision of the UK not being governed by gurning sociopaths. That’s enough to convince voters atm but who knows where the notoriously amnesiac great British public will be in a year’s time?
    Labour appear to be offering their own core vote next to nothing, and the Conservative core vote a bad copy of the party that has been pinning them to the ground and stuffing their all-too-willing mouths full of gold for the last thirteen years. Their entire election strategy seems to have consisted of "look at the fat blond wanker, our wooden mannequin will offer some blessed relief." Now the Tories have found a marketable replacement for the fat blond wanker, Labour is flailing about for a response.

    There's no big idea from Labour, no vision, no sense of direction, no meaningful program for change. This entirely explains the dissatisfaction of Labour voters with Starmer's leadership: the hardcore partisans may be willing to sing his praises regardless, but the softer flank of Labour's support thinks "You're offering me nothing of value."

    Labour are running as the Not Tory party, and that's it. Where does that leave you once the Tories have mollified their ageing core vote and the remainder of the electorate is not actively repelled by the Prime Minister, and thinks that you offer no alternative to his platform? It leaves you stranded in the middle of nowhere.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    I don't want Labour to have a majority.

    Labour on 300 seats and Lib Dems on 30 and the Conservatives on 275 seats would suit me. They'd have to drop the batshit and do vote by vote deals, and there'd be an even present threat of LDs/Tories combining to outvote and block Labour.
    Far more likely outcome than Heathener's.....
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,503
    malcolmg said:

    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.

    Lot of anger from Brighton this am about var favouring Spurs
    Worst idea ever for football. Wrecks the games and makes more mistakes than the refs used to. Total garbage.
    Yet almost every other sport includes some equivalent of VAR at the top level and largely uses it to uncontroversial bemeficial effect, and has been doing so for years while football pigheadedly maintained its impossibility.
    Then, latterly, football does an about turn, acts as if it invented the concept, and implements it in a uniquely shit way which appears to disrupt the game without leading to better decisions.
    Once again, the conclusion seems inescapable that football is the stupidest of all the sports.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137
    pigeon said:

    Sandpit said:

    IanB2 said:

    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    The trouble is, even if we accept Labour must climb into the gutter, Sunak is the wrong target because no-one believes he wants armed gangs of child molesters to roam the land. It is the same mistake the Tories made when portraying Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Labour ought to be targeting Tory sleaze and corruption, especially around PPE during the Covid pandemic with its echoes of Partygate. Voters made sacrifices while Tories were throwing billions to their dodgy mates. Voters will be swayed by that because they are already halfway there.

    Saying Labour will reduce crime is also good in itself, especially if there is some mechanism promised, such as rebuilding however many courts the Tories have closed, but the personal attacks on Rishi are likely to be unproductive or even counterproductive.

    And the fact Labour is just talking about sentencing suggests there is no serious policy there either.
    Indeed. You wonder what genius Labour strategy meeting debated all the issues that are worrying people right now, and came up with Sunak being supposedly soft on child abuse as the right one to target?
    Where’s the positivity and the vision? 1995-era Blair had vision and positivity in spades.
    Not that I’m persuaded by it, but Labour are positive that they’re not the Tories and they have a vision of the UK not being governed by gurning sociopaths. That’s enough to convince voters atm but who knows where the notoriously amnesiac great British public will be in a year’s time?
    Labour appear to be offering their own core vote next to nothing, and the Conservative core vote a bad copy of the party that has been pinning them to the ground and stuffing their all-too-willing mouths full of gold for the last thirteen years. Their entire election strategy seems to have consisted of "look at the fat blond wanker, our wooden mannequin will offer some blessed relief." Now the Tories have found a marketable replacement for the fat blond wanker, Labour is flailing about for a response.

    There's no big idea from Labour, no vision, no sense of direction, no meaningful program for change. This entirely explains the dissatisfaction of Labour voters with Starmer's leadership: the hardcore partisans may be willing to sing his praises regardless, but the softer flank of Labour's support thinks "You're offering me nothing of value."

    Labour are running as the Not Tory party, and that's it. Where does that leave you once the Tories have mollified their ageing core vote and the remainder of the electorate is not actively repelled by the Prime Minister, and thinks that you offer no alternative to his platform? It leaves you stranded in the middle of nowhere.
    As I've been reporting for a while, there's no love for Starmer out there on the doorsteps. I can honestly say no-one has said he will change their vote.

    Lots of Tories wanting to see that the Tories have stopped being stooopid and are worthy of their vote again. Evidence to date? The pendulum is now swinging that way.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,143
    FPT
    carnforth said:

    In case you were wondering why a 92 year old woman needed a fancy camper van:

    One neighbour said: 'It's been there for two and a quarter years and it's not moved. It was brought here by two men. They came in early January 2021 around two and a bit years ago, and it's been there ever since. It has never moved to my knowledge.'

    Of course it hasn't moved.

    The windows are just painted plywood...
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,143
    ...
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,014
    edited April 2023
    Foxy said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Football: both my EPL bets failed in part to own goals. I feel the universe owes me a booby prize.

    As I have been pointing out for some weeks, Leicester for relegation was massive value at 5/1. Probably still some value at near evens. We are hopeless.
    Never mind, @Foxy, the cricket season has started. You can watch Leicestershire winning every week. Oh, wait …….
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    Morning all and just for the record I told my nearest neighbours that they were making a mistake voting for Starmer in the Labour leadership election because he would bore the English working class. With every speech he makes, that seems clearer. It is Anas Sarwar who is responsible for Labour's recovery in the polls in Scotland. He is the sort of New Labour politician that even middle of the road Scots Tories could vote for. Just to confirm Easterross will still be voting Tory as the new Caithness, Sutherland and Ross seat is looking like a cracker of an SNP/LibDem marginal and I am hoping cousin Jamie wins.
    Nice to see you on Easteross, however WTF has Sarwar done since becoming leader. Invisible which makes him much better than previous donkeys I will grant you but he has done and said nothing , not a peep. he would not recognise a policy if it hit him in the face.
  • Options
    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,534
    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    I don't want Labour to have a majority.

    Labour on 300 seats and Lib Dems on 30 and the Conservatives on 275 seats would suit me. They'd have to drop the batshit and do vote by vote deals, and there'd be an even present threat of LDs/Tories combining to outvote and block Labour.
    My fear is that, dependent on LDs and SNPs, the tendency would be to more bstshit rather than less.
    I don't think the SNP should feature.

    The LDs absolute priority would be europhilia but we saw under Cameron how little influence they had on foreign policy even in a formal coalition with double the seats.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    Foxy said:

    malcolmg said:

    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.

    Lot of anger from Brighton this am about var favouring Spurs
    Worst idea ever for football. Wrecks the games and makes more mistakes than the refs used to. Total garbage.
    No, people forget how poor many decisions were before VAR.

    On Tuesday, Leicester were awarded an injury time penalty against Villa, disallowed on VAR. It was the correct decision.
    It was part of the game though, you won some you lost some. Now we are like American sports, start , stop tedious and takes all the edge and excitement out of the game. I think it is crap.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,534
    Where does Keith come from?
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,846

    Barnesian said:

    I agree with Helen Lewis that Starmer is “ruthless” in the sense that he is determined, focused on winning, and not sentimentally bound to factions or individuals. But to me the word implies a clarity of purpose which he does not have. Yes, he is determined to climb the mountain, but at any given moment he seems unsure of the path to the top. He kind of scrabbles around from side to side until he finds a way to get a few feet further along, and sometimes heads in the wrong direction before changing course.

    His treatment of the gender issue is typical. A ruthless leader would have worked out what he thought about it by now, steamrollered internal opposition, and scraped this particular barnacle off the boat. Instead, he has shifted towards a tenable position by salami-sliced increments while allowing senior colleagues to ignore or contradict him. It is painful to watch, and typified by his latest, excruciating statement that 99.9% of women don’t have a penis. In politics, you really have to round up.


    https://ianleslie.substack.com/p/the-tortoise

    That is a great article - well worth reading
    It completely sums Starmer up.
    It progresses to be far more generous to him than that paragraph suggests. I think, on balance, it is a pro-Starmer article.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,252
    This sort of egregious bullshit is pretty universal but the Herald has made it an art form. In fact the only member of the shadow cabinet that they can drum up is Lucy Powell who says she stands by the tweet.



    https://twitter.com/heraldscotland/status/1644467587819114496?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q


  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    Nicola Sturgeon ordered SNP chiefs to stop talking about party finances and insisted they were 'fine'
    A furious Nicola Sturgeon ordered senior party figures to stop asking questions about the party’s finances. During an explosive party meeting, the then First Minister tried to quash questions over the missing £600,000 raised through crowdfunders for a second IndyRef.

    And she dismissed concerns the party’s National Executive Committee was raising about the lack of transparency over party finances. In a recorded meeting, she said: “We don’t need to talk about the finances. The finances are absolutely fine.”

    A source said: “She told the meeting that there was nothing wrong with the accounts and that people should stop talking about it because it was undermining the party. It’s fair to say she was pretty raging about it. She went on at some length telling everyone that everything was absolutely fine and that it shouldn’t be discussed.”
    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/nicola-sturgeon-ordered-snp-chiefs-29664221
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,997

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    I don't want Labour to have a majority.

    Labour on 300 seats and Lib Dems on 30 and the Conservatives on 275 seats would suit me. They'd have to drop the batshit and do vote by vote deals, and there'd be an even present threat of LDs/Tories combining to outvote and block Labour.
    My fear is that, dependent on LDs and SNPs, the tendency would be to more bstshit rather than less.
    I don't think the SNP should feature.

    The LDs absolute priority would be europhilia but we saw under Cameron how little influence they had on foreign policy even in a formal coalition with double the seats.
    I think the LDs absolute priority would be electoral reform. That would also suit most of the Labour Party and transform Britain, even if the subject is boring to a lot of electors.
  • Options

    Where does Keith come from?

    From the same wags that christened Starmer 'Gordon Brittas.'
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,563
    edited April 2023
    Scott_xP said:

    ...

    When Sunak accused Starmer in the Commons last month of being on the side of people traffickers, branding him “just another lefty lawyer” standing in the way of stopping illegal immigration, Labour strategists decided it was “time to take the gloves off”.

    The final straw came last week when Suella Braverman, the home secretary, claimed Labour-run councillors failed to act on grooming gangs over fears they would be called racist. A senior party source said: “That was the moment we decided to go for it.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    Like the Nazis, the Tories are reaping the whirlwind they started with their Blitz.

    Starmer = Arthur Harris.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,368

    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.

    Lot of anger from Brighton this am about var favouring Spurs
    It tends to favour the big
    Big teams. Before var who can forget the 7 mins injury time when there hadn't been any injuries that allowed Steve Bruce to score against Norwich that led to them winning the title...
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    SNP are determined to destroy themselves, having these lunatic Greens doing anything other than cleaning the toilets is madness. Their latest wheeze

    Shoppers face price hikes on drinks by up to a third under the Scottish Government’s controversial drinks recycling scheme, which has been compared to a poll tax on the poor. The Sunday Mail can reveal the cost of common items such as beer, water and fizzy juice will soar way beyond the extra 20p-per-item recycling fee when the Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) is launched in August.

    Former cabinet secretary for rural development Fergus Ewing said he was astonished by the latest revelation and launched a blistering attack on the SNP and Greens scheme.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941

    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    They need to learn that attack ads need to be very carefully targeted, using online platforms, and not sent to the general public. Labour’s strategy this week, will likely bring out a whole load of shy Tories unhappy with the characterisation.

    Meanwhile, if Labour are going to go big on Justice, expect many reminders (from the Tories and elsewhere) of Starmer’s half decade as DPP.

    I’m sure Farage or UKIP can remind the Red Wall about Jimmy Savile, Labour’s strategy here seems to be like a mud fight with a pig.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,307

    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    Trojan horses?

    Is Starmer really so utterly thick? Rishi sending his stormtroopers in under cover is absolute genius.

    Does anyone remember the Peter Cook film, the Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer? Starmer appears to be as foolish as the Labour Prime Minister played by George A. Cooper
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,965
    I am not sure leader ratings are that much of an issue, or guide, if both leaders are getting similar numbers for favourable/unfavourable. They may matter if there are big discrepancies between those numbers and the headline voting. But that isn’t the case currently. As TSE says, the Tory brand is currently very toxic. People like Braverman and Anderson will ensure it remains so for a large number of voters, whatever Sunak does. Labour being the biggest party in a hung Parliament remains the likeliest result, just as it has done for a couple of years now.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,138

    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    This stuff might be effective if there were an element of truth to it. But I think the reason it's attracted so much attention is that it's just so ridiculous.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941
    malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    malcolmg said:

    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.

    Lot of anger from Brighton this am about var favouring Spurs
    Worst idea ever for football. Wrecks the games and makes more mistakes than the refs used to. Total garbage.
    No, people forget how poor many decisions were before VAR.

    On Tuesday, Leicester were awarded an injury time penalty against Villa, disallowed on VAR. It was the correct decision.
    It was part of the game though, you won some you lost some. Now we are like American sports, start , stop tedious and takes all the edge and excitement out of the game. I think it is crap.
    The Americans genuinely suggested that, in the coming World Cup, they should have drinks breaks every 15 minutes when the game stops, because they wanted to show more adverts the players might get too hot.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132

    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    This is all ultimately for nought if the Labour Party won't advance a viable alternative. As with all the rest of the myriad problems with public services, they need to formulate a plan to fix them and find from somewhere the colossal sums of money needed to pay for the plan.

    It's where the money's meant to come from that's likely to prove their undoing, in the end. They can probably get away with a certain amount of borrowing to invest for infrastructure projects, albeit that they're going to have to be extremely careful not to repeat the mistakes of PFI and end up saddling public sector organisations with even more debt servicing obligations. However, ultimately they need to service the ongoing costs of, for example, paying more for care home places so the staff can be paid enough not to sod off to Aldi, and putting tens of thousands of extra police on the streets, by raising an awful lot of tax.

    Low and middle income earners have already been bled white and there's no indication that Labour are willing to milk the obvious source of extra revenue which is asset wealth - residential and commercial property, stocks and shares. So where's the money to pay for all this stuff?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,793
    Sandpit said:

    malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    malcolmg said:

    The biggest scandal of the day is VAR. Yet again Fulham robbed this time by a handball goal. Last time a player pushed over in frnt of the ref who ignored it as did VAR. Fulham should sue. VAR needs sorting out.

    Lot of anger from Brighton this am about var favouring Spurs
    Worst idea ever for football. Wrecks the games and makes more mistakes than the refs used to. Total garbage.
    No, people forget how poor many decisions were before VAR.

    On Tuesday, Leicester were awarded an injury time penalty against Villa, disallowed on VAR. It was the correct decision.
    It was part of the game though, you won some you lost some. Now we are like American sports, start , stop tedious and takes all the edge and excitement out of the game. I think it is crap.
    The Americans genuinely suggested that, in the coming World Cup, they should have drinks breaks every 15 minutes when the game stops, because they wanted to show more adverts the players might get too hot.
    It might suit our new managers soccer ball offensive plays in the goalzone.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,368
    malcolmg said:

    SNP are determined to destroy themselves, having these lunatic Greens doing anything other than cleaning the toilets is madness. Their latest wheeze

    Shoppers face price hikes on drinks by up to a third under the Scottish Government’s controversial drinks recycling scheme, which has been compared to a poll tax on the poor. The Sunday Mail can reveal the cost of common items such as beer, water and fizzy juice will soar way beyond the extra 20p-per-item recycling fee when the Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) is launched in August.

    Former cabinet secretary for rural development Fergus Ewing said he was astonished by the latest revelation and launched a blistering attack on the SNP and Greens scheme.

    Brilliant idea and tax beercans and wine bottkes macdonalds crap and coke bottles and anything people throw out of their cars. It would create an industry of auto cleanup.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137
    Barnesian said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    I don't want Labour to have a majority.

    Labour on 300 seats and Lib Dems on 30 and the Conservatives on 275 seats would suit me. They'd have to drop the batshit and do vote by vote deals, and there'd be an even present threat of LDs/Tories combining to outvote and block Labour.
    My fear is that, dependent on LDs and SNPs, the tendency would be to more bstshit rather than less.
    I don't think the SNP should feature.

    The LDs absolute priority would be europhilia but we saw under Cameron how little influence they had on foreign policy even in a formal coalition with double the seats.
    I think the LDs absolute priority would be electoral reform. That would also suit most of the Labour Party and transform Britain, even if the subject is boring to a lot of electors.
    Are you suggesting there should be electoral reform without a Referendum on it?
  • Options
    londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,216

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    I don't want Labour to have a majority.

    Labour on 300 seats and Lib Dems on 30 and the Conservatives on 275 seats would suit me. They'd have to drop the batshit and do vote by vote deals, and there'd be an even present threat of LDs/Tories combining to outvote and block Labour.
    This is looking like an increasingly plausible outcome. A little while ago it looked like CON would do well to get 220. Now 250, 275 or maybe a little more looks quite realistic.

    Still a huge seat loss for CON but certainly not the wipeout that some LAB wishful thinkers have suggested.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137
    Chris said:

    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    This stuff might be effective if there were an element of truth to it. But I think the reason it's attracted so much attention is that it's just so ridiculous.
    Chris said:

    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    This stuff might be effective if there were an element of truth to it. But I think the reason it's attracted so much attention is that it's just so ridiculous.
    Labour no longer "shirking the shit" will give the right-wing media carte blanche to shove an anvil in their boxing gloves.

    Watch Labour whine "it isn't fair....".

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,991
    Heathener said:

    Also worth bearing in mind that Labour intend to keep going with their negative attacks on Sunak. He is a very easy target and they should not let him off.

    Mike might claim to disapprove of such things, which is mildly amusing to those of us who have seen the LibDems at work, but it's naivety that has cost Labour in the past and the tories are a disgusting mob who will stop at nothing.

    So I'm afraid it's gloves off.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    £££

    p.s. not saying I approve of such things. But it's politics and it's going to be dirty.

    If you just accept it as how things are it seems to me you do approve of such things by default.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Labour's poll leads are so massive any result close to that is a majority, and a big one at that. A hung Parliament is increasingly less likely, I think.
  • Options
    BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,997

    Barnesian said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    On topic, I hope for the country’s sake the Tories lose. Thirteen years would be enough for a superb government. This lot were out of ideas five years ago.

    I hope for democracy’s sake that the Tories lose. One party states are a bad thing. We want a government with a modest majority and an opposition that seems to have a decent chance of replacing them and will keep them on their toes. The Coalition years were the first time we’d had that since the 1960s and the years since have not been notable for good governance.


    Most of all I hope for the Tories’ sake that they lose. Five more years of this and they will suffer a shellacking they will never recover from.

    The Conservatives were corrupt in 1997, after 18 years in office. Labour were corrupt in 2010, after 13 years in office. The Conservatives are now corrupt , after 13 years in office. We probably need more frequent changes in government.

    The ideal result at the next election would be something like Labour 335 seats, Conservatives 250, Lib Dems 20, Others 45.
    I don't want Labour to have a majority.

    Labour on 300 seats and Lib Dems on 30 and the Conservatives on 275 seats would suit me. They'd have to drop the batshit and do vote by vote deals, and there'd be an even present threat of LDs/Tories combining to outvote and block Labour.
    My fear is that, dependent on LDs and SNPs, the tendency would be to more bstshit rather than less.
    I don't think the SNP should feature.

    The LDs absolute priority would be europhilia but we saw under Cameron how little influence they had on foreign policy even in a formal coalition with double the seats.
    I think the LDs absolute priority would be electoral reform. That would also suit most of the Labour Party and transform Britain, even if the subject is boring to a lot of electors.
    Are you suggesting there should be electoral reform without a Referendum on it?
    Yes - if it is in the party manifestos. It will be in the LD one. The challenge is to persuade Starmer to allow it to be in the Labour manifesto.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,307
    ...

    Labour's poll leads are so massive any result close to that is a majority, and a big one at that. A hung Parliament is increasingly less likely, I think.

    1992 is the number to consider. Bet accordingly, thank me in Autumn 2024.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,965
    pigeon said:

    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    This is all ultimately for nought if the Labour Party won't advance a viable alternative. As with all the rest of the myriad problems with public services, they need to formulate a plan to fix them and find from somewhere the colossal sums of money needed to pay for the plan.

    It's where the money's meant to come from that's likely to prove their undoing, in the end. They can probably get away with a certain amount of borrowing to invest for infrastructure projects, albeit that they're going to have to be extremely careful not to repeat the mistakes of PFI and end up saddling public sector organisations with even more debt servicing obligations. However, ultimately they need to service the ongoing costs of, for example, paying more for care home places so the staff can be paid enough not to sod off to Aldi, and putting tens of thousands of extra police on the streets, by raising an awful lot of tax.

    Low and middle income earners have already been bled white and there's no indication that Labour are willing to milk the obvious source of extra revenue which is asset wealth - residential and commercial property, stocks and shares. So where's the money to pay for all this stuff?
    We can’t afford to bring alleged rapists to trial is really not going to cut the mustard. I am pretty sure people will take additional taxes on wealth to sort the criminal justice system out.

  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137

    Labour strategists are cock-a-hoop with how the adverts have landed. The first advert tweeted has received 20.8 million views, making it arguably the most successful Labour attack in recent memory. A party insider said: “Nice doesn’t win elections. They have got used to Labour shirking the dirty stuff. That’s changed.”...

    ...The party is not going to stop there. According to senior Labour sources, one of the next attack ads will suggest the PM has “effectively decriminalised rape”.

    It will claim that under the Tories “only 1.6 per cent of rapists have been charged”. A source said: “We aren’t talking to Twitter. We are talking to the vast majority of the country who want to see child rapists locked up and know the Tories have destroyed the criminal justice system. [Sunak] is leading the government that is responsible and he has got the man [Jeremy Hunt] who butchered the NHS as his chancellor.”

    It is understood Labour drew up the messages some time ago and have been waiting for the right time to deploy them....

    ...It has even been claimed that a group of former Tory election staffers have turned against their own party and approached Labour to help formulate their election strategy.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-labour-ad-tweet-keir-starmer-2023-dlbw6b5dd

    Trojan horses?

    Is Starmer really so utterly thick? Rishi sending his stormtroopers in under cover is absolute genius.

    Does anyone remember the Peter Cook film, the Rise and Rise of Michael Rimmer? Starmer appears to be as foolish as the Labour Prime Minister played by George A. Cooper
    Thanks a bunch. That's given me my earworm for the next couple of days.

    Michael Rimmer.

    Arnold Rimmer.

    The Arnold Rimmer song....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4TLto-nKfU&ab_channel=MrsMac5
This discussion has been closed.