I take no pleasure in others’ misfortune (on the whole, anyway) but today’s been a great day for the Greens. Not just for results, but also as a vindication for focusing on actual environmental issues. And this current Conservative government really deserved to get walloped.
Though tbf nothing could make me laugh more than the comment upthread about Spaffer being the ‘moral leader of Europe’.
Environmental issues is a bit much. Tractor country didn't vote for net zero.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
Well, having just returned from an extended drinking session, I've caught up with the news and have a view.
As a Labour supporter, at this time last night I thought that Labour would underachieve (I'm used to it), and that the Tories would not suffer the losses they have. And I didn't expect the Lib Dems and Greens to make as much progress. I was utterly wrong.
If there were a GE next week, the Tories would be slaughtered. Enough Lib Dems and Greens would help Labour out in Con/Lab marginals, and enough of us Labourites would help the Lib Dems out in Con/Lib Dem marginals, to rout the Tories. A healthy Labour majority would ensue. But of course, there won't be a GE next week, and lots could still happen.
But as of now it's been a fantastic day for the anti-Tory forces, and those looking for some sunlight in the Tory results are struggling.
It's been great fun, hasn't it?
Here's another Labour supporter cheering "anti-Tory" not Labour successes.
Indeed. I am as keen as the next person on getting this government out. I would be even keener if anyone could credibly describe in a non unicorn way the alternatives on offer and how they might actually work what is needed.
Interesting. What gives a better indication of current westminster voting intention? a projected national share calculated from how people actually voted in local elections, or a westminster voting intention opinion poll? Maybe the second, which would make some of the kerfuffle about what the local elections mean for a general election a bit of a waste of time.
I am biased, but I would suggest that the Local voting intention was a clear signal that people were looking locally when casting their votes. In a national poll, Labour is the generic anti-Tory party on local elecitons it may not be. Put the two polls together with today's vote and it says to me that there has been a lot of anti-Tory tactical voting. If that continues to the general election, the Tories are in deep, deep trouble. But I acknowledge I am biased so there are probably other takes available!
If that's the case I wonder how effective that anti-tory vote is, compared to the generic anti-Tory Labour vote. Has anyone calculated how many councillors the Conservatives would have lost on the kind of (national equivalent) vote shown in the national poll ie Labour 48, Con 27, Libdem 7 etc?
I think the problem generally is that although I am by and large a Labour supporter at the moment, I do not expect life to get any better under a Labour government. I think that may be why this doesn't feel like 1997.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.
Well, having just returned from an extended drinking session, I've caught up with the news and have a view.
As a Labour supporter, at this time last night I thought that Labour would underachieve (I'm used to it), and that the Tories would not suffer the losses they have. And I didn't expect the Lib Dems and Greens to make as much progress. I was utterly wrong.
If there were a GE next week, the Tories would be slaughtered. Enough Lib Dems and Greens would help Labour out in Con/Lab marginals, and enough of us Labourites would help the Lib Dems out in Con/Lib Dem marginals, to rout the Tories. A healthy Labour majority would ensue. But of course, there won't be a GE next week, and lots could still happen.
But as of now it's been a fantastic day for the anti-Tory forces, and those looking for some sunlight in the Tory results are struggling.
It's been great fun, hasn't it?
Here's another Labour supporter cheering "anti-Tory" not Labour successes.
Oh do sod off you miserable, negative git. I'm more than happy with Labour's performance.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
I think we’re talking at cross-purposes. Lib Dems winning e.g. Hazel Grove from the Cons helps Labour. No? I’m sure their ambition is to win a majority, regardless.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.
He was replying to my point that a number of Labour supporters have, very notably, been cheering "anti-Tory" results not Labour results.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
I think we’re talking at cross-purposes. Lib Dems winning e.g. Hazel Grove from the Cons helps Labour. No? I’m sure their ambition is to win a majority, regardless.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
I think the problem generally is that although I am by and large a Labour supporter at the moment, I do not expect life to get any better under a Labour government. I think that may be why this doesn't feel like 1997.
Exactly. It feels to me like they're basically auditioning to manage decline less incompetently than Rishi Sunak. It's pretty much change for the sake of change. There's no inspiration at all.
NEW: Conservatives lose their majority on mid-Sussex to NOC. Lib Dems now the biggest group. Conservatives down 11. Lib Dems up 8.
Real discontent in True Blue world, has been brewing ever since Johnson arrived frankly.
Take a look at the councils which have gone NOC. On so many of them it is very clear that it won't be a Tory minority administration. They are out...
In a lot of the South I think water pollution has been a real galvanising force. Ignored by the government but extremely salient. Only the Lib Dems and Greens have bothered to make anything of it.
It’s a perfect Lib Dem/Green issue/policy.
It’s Clegg/tuition fees, all over again.
“Do you want to tax people, to the tune of hundred billion quid, in order to stop 0.1% of our sewage going into rivers/the sea?”
I don’t know the figures, but they can’t be far off.
LOL. Do we want water quality at around the EU average? Yes, we do.
Oooh. Starmer would love that for his leaflets: “we’re going FORCE the water companies to BEAT the EU average for water quality!” Or somesuch.
If he can get it past Rachel Reeves, that kind of policy/spinning could be really electorally effective.
We’re back to the basic problem, though. It’s fking expensive to sort out.
Profit before people:
"over £ 18.1 billion was paid out to shareholders of the nine large English regional water and sewerage companies between 2007 and 2016"
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.
He was replying to my point that a number of Labour supporters have, very notably, been cheering "anti-Tory" results not Labour results.
So what? Elections are a zero sum game. If the Tories do badly, the alternatives will consequently do well. What this election shows is the Conservative vote is very efficient - they are being lost very efficiently. As the biggest alternative, Labour will pick up most of these votes.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.
He was replying to my point that a number of Labour supporters have, very notably, been cheering "anti-Tory" results not Labour results.
Just get the bastards out. They’ve done enough damage. If it means a coalition, who cares? Tribalism’s bollocks.
Besides, if the Lib Dems are in coalition Starmer, with crocodile tears, can point to a concerted pitch back towards Europe as the price the Lib Dems demand. It should anchor Labour to the centre, the Continuity Corbynites can be happily ignored.
I guess this shouldn't be a surprise - the BBC's royal coverage is always so nauseatingly sycophantic it must make even the most ardent monarchist want to throw up.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Congratulations. And I think a later in life career change for.you?
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
Our aim is for Rishi Sunak to drive to Buckingham Palace and advise the king to invite Sir Keir Starmer to form a government.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.
He was replying to my point that a number of Labour supporters have, very notably, been cheering "anti-Tory" results not Labour results.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Also validates HYUFD's theory about the efficacy of broth ?
I guess this shouldn't be a surprise - the BBC's royal coverage is always so nauseatingly sycophantic it must make even the most ardent monarchist want to throw up.
These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.
Those values matter to most of us. It's good that they matter to you, but that doesn't make you special.
The question was why do you feel that you have a duty to vote Conservative? This is even though in your opinion they do nothing for you. The Communist Party of Britain probably does nothing for you too. Why not vote for them?
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Congratulations. And I think a later in life career change for.you?
Cheers. Something I've gone back to after many years away.
Well, it made for an interesting day, but it is done now. I have no intention of sticking around for the coronation as I have absolutely no interest in it at all.
Time to return to the PB back-benches until the next interesting events whatever they turn out to be.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Congratulations!
From your output on here, you do seem like a very sensible, down to earth chap.
Exactly the kind of person that, I imagine, some kid who might not have had the greatest start in life, could look up to and inspire them make something of their lives and, when faced with the inevitable moral complexity that adulthood presents them with, make the right decisions.
All that being said, over the last few days Sir Keir has come up with some things that make me start to believe that maybe he does have a clue - so maybe it'll all be moot in the end. He absolutely has to use this as a springboard to put forward a manifesto to improve the country on his own terms, and to get a big enough majority to implement it. The Tories aren't going to win the next election, so the country needs Labour to be strong and effective in government. A hung parliament doesn't help anyone.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
On today's results Labour are quite likely to win a majority. It depends if the electorate will vote next time as tactically against the Conservatives as they dId this time.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Congratulations!
From your output on here, you do seem like a very sensible, down to earth chap.
Exactly the kind of person that, I imagine, some kid who might not have had the greatest start in life, could look up to and inspire them make something of their lives and, when faced with the inevitable moral complexity that adulthood presents them with, make the right decisions.
They’re lucky to have you.
Gosh. Cheers. How kind. Feeling the validation all over. Thank you. Hope so.
A basket of stocks selected by ChatGPT, a chatbot powered by artificial intelligence (AI), has far outperformed some of the most popular investment funds in the United Kingdom.
Between March 6 and April 28, a dummy portfolio of 38 stocks gained 4.9% while 10 leading investment funds clocked an average loss of 0.8%, according to an experiment conducted by financial comparison site finder.com.
All the studies showing shitty perfomance for baskets of stocks picked by ChatGPT have been discarded.
My inclination is also to be sceptical about these claims, not least because any advantage ChatGPT has at the moment will be eroded as people use it, and the unpredictable random walk will reassert itself. For the time being it is exploiting imperfectly distributed knowledge. But here's a separate, reinforcing study:
Abstract We examine the potential of ChatGPT, and other large language models, in predicting stock market returns using sentiment analysis of news headlines. We use ChatGPT to indicate whether a given headline is good, bad, or irrelevant news for firms' stock prices. We then compute a numerical score and document a positive correlation between these "ChatGPT scores" and subsequent daily stock market returns. Further, ChatGPT outperforms traditional sentiment analysis methods. We find that more basic models such as GPT-1, GPT-2, and BERT cannot accurately forecast returns, indicating return predictability is an emerging capacity of complex models. Our results suggest that incorporating advanced language models into the investment decision-making process can yield more accurate predictions and enhance the performance of quantitative trading strategies.
They've recreated Marshall Wace, then, only using ChatGPT.
Here's the thing, though. I bet you ChatGPT wasn't doing it in real time. I bet that they analysed the headlines, said we should have bought [x] at the time the article was published. And I'm sure that's right.
But in the real world there are already hedge funds running billions of dollars that have finely tuned sentiment analysis that make decisions in thousandths of a second.
I'd also ask if the analysis included any trading or custody costs: because it's very easy to beat an investment fund with a paper portfolio, when you don't have any of the actual costs incurred by trading shares.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
I don't expect us to win a majority. If we do, that would be a Brucie Bonus.
Stopping the Tories fucking up the country, enriching their mates and behaving like they are born to rule is my priority.
Matt Goodwin hesitantly sits on the fence on the subject of whether the Tories are diabolically or merely catastrophically bad. He doesn't outline how anyone might have done different in any sort of detail. Worth reading for a line on what thoughtful Tory friends are feeling.
Conclusion: being a politics prof is easier than having to run a country.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
I don't expect us to win a majority. If we do, that would be a Brucie Bonus.
Stopping the Tories fucking up the country, enriching their mates and behaving like they are born to rule is my priority.
Negative, negative, negative.
And so offputting.
I really hope Sir Keir doesn't fall into this way of thinking.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
Starmer’s shit scared of being accused of wanting to reverse Brexit. He’s spiking the client press’s guns on this issue, and not scaring the Red Wall knuckle-draggers in the process.
It’s not pretty, it’s not inspiring, but as long as it gets these venal, immoral bastards out, I, and many on the left, can live with that. A soupçon of Lib Demmish Euro love would be very welcome.
There’ll be lots of lovely Labour policies, I don’t doubt that, but they have to be pragmatic and not give the Mail, Telegraph, GB News, Matt Goodwin right wing circle jerk society any anti-Brexit shite to gorge on. Because it seems that Starmer is so sensible that there’s probably not a lot else they can blow out of all proportion. He certainly won’t be having any bacon sandwiches.
Guardian: "The Tories have lost 959 seats while Labour have gained 625 seats and the Lib Dems are +420."
Telegraph: the same.
BBC: "LAB +527; CON -1,061;LD +416"
Times: Con -1030; Lab +510
Why the different figures?
I expect this will be because the BBC figures are compared to the last elections, while the Guaridan(/PA?) figures will be compared to the state of play at dissolution, and the parties tend to lose councillors to independents in between council elections. Plus you also have how redrawn ward boundaries are treated - do you compare to notional results, the previous elections, or to the sitting councillors on the eve of election?
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Well done... I've done something similar - been offered and accepted a full time job in the public sector even though it means a pay cut. I took a break from it for a couple of years after getting fed up with the dysfunctionality of the public sector. I found that a) I am not motivated to make money despite lots of opportunities to do so and b) after a while you want to stick at doing one thing, work in a solid team etc, rather than hopping around, and c) no job is a life sentence and there are always alternatives.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
In the last 17 years, only once (2019) has either of Labour or the Conservatives got to 350 seats. And in 2005, Labour only just pipped it, getting 355.
So your "bare minimum" would be the second best result of recent times. (And that time was achieved when a terrorist loving anti-Semite Marxist was the leader of the opposition.)
Someone in our street is marking the coronation by adorning the front of their house with two union jacks and pictures of Donald Trump and Prince Harry.
Somewhat off-message.
Flags also flying in the pub and outside the Prod church. And one neighbour has union jack bunting.
These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.
They matter to you at times. They didn't matter to you when it came to Truss, and it hasn't escaped my notice that even now when she makes a high profile speech supporting your personal hobby horse (pushing back against woke), you don't have the balls to comment in its favour. I am afraid I see little to admire in your insistence on lashing yourself to the mast of sinking Sunak, it just strikes me as pigheaded pride; an inability to accept that you backed a dud.
These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.
They matter to you at times. They didn't matter to you when it came to Truss, and it hasn't escaped my notice that even now when she makes a high profile speech supporting your personal hobby horse (pushing back against woke), you don't have the balls to comment in its favour. I am afraid I see little to admire in your insistence on lashing yourself to the mast of sinking Sunak, it just strikes me as pigheaded pride; an inability to accept that you backed a dud.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.
In the last 17 years, only once (2019) has either of Labour or the Conservatives got to 350 seats. And in 2005, Labour only just pipped it, getting 355.
So your "bare minimum" would be the second best result of recent times. (And that time was achieved when a terrorist loving anti-Semite Marxist was the leader of the opposition.)
Yes, that's the position the Tories have put them in. Cameron was widely seen to have "failed to win a majority" after Brown presided over the crash - making massive gains that seemed impossible three years before the election was suddenly an under-performance.. If Sir Keir falls short of 325 then the parallels will be poignant.
These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.
They matter to you at times. They didn't matter to you when it came to Truss, and it hasn't escaped my notice that even now when she makes a high profile speech supporting your personal hobby horse (pushing back against woke), you don't have the balls to comment in its favour. I am afraid I see little to admire in your insistence on lashing yourself to the mast of sinking Sunak, it just strikes me as pigheaded pride; an inability to accept that you backed a dud.
Sunak is definitely an asset to the Conservatives at this point. Obviously counter-factuals are difficult but I think the tories are in a far better position than had they stuck with Liz Truss, despite her 'anti-woke' credentials.
These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.
They matter to you at times. They didn't matter to you when it came to Truss, and it hasn't escaped my notice that even now when she makes a high profile speech supporting your personal hobby horse (pushing back against woke), you don't have the balls to comment in its favour. I am afraid I see little to admire in your insistence on lashing yourself to the mast of sinking Sunak, it just strikes me as pigheaded pride; an inability to accept that you backed a dud.
Liz is a dead loss.
CR could agree with her entire policy platform it wouldn't matter because she's a complete and utter non-starter.
There's no point wasting your time on someone that is just a total waste of space...
Well done LAB, LD, GRN. Good results for all of you.
Not so good for CON but it's not over yet!
Enjoy the Coronation goodnight all 👍
Yes, a coronation, something symbolic of epochal change, should help keep Tory minds off the locals signalling a likely change in power in the country.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
Starmer’s shit scared of being accused of wanting to reverse Brexit. He’s spiking the client press’s guns on this issue, and not scaring the Red Wall knuckle-draggers in the process.
It’s not pretty, it’s not inspiring, but as long as it gets these venal, immoral bastards out, I, and many on the left, can live with that. A soupçon of Lib Demmish Euro love would be very welcome.
There’ll be lots of lovely Labour policies, I don’t doubt that, but they have to be pragmatic and not give the Mail, Telegraph, GB News, Matt Goodwin right wing circle jerk society any anti-Brexit shite to gorge on. Because it seems that Starmer is so sensible that there’s probably not a lot else they can blow out of all proportion. He certainly won’t be having any bacon sandwiches.
I've said before, I bow to no one in my remainerism. I'd happily advocate for a European Federation, of which I would wish the UK is a part, but I'd rather see Starmer as PM than see him lose by promising to reverse Brexit. He has my vote.*
Other than the FT, newspaper front pages ignore politics and are 100% coronation.
Just as planned by the powers that be when they scheduled tomorrow's nonsense.
I'm sure you're joking, since that would undermine the impact of local election losses how? The change has occurred, anyone who didn't notice but capable of noticing will still find a way to know.
These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.
They matter to you at times. They didn't matter to you when it came to Truss, and it hasn't escaped my notice that even now when she makes a high profile speech supporting your personal hobby horse (pushing back against woke), you don't have the balls to comment in its favour. I am afraid I see little to admire in your insistence on lashing yourself to the mast of sinking Sunak, it just strikes me as pigheaded pride; an inability to accept that you backed a dud.
Liz is a dead loss.
CR could agree with her entire policy platform it wouldn't matter because she's a complete and utter non-starter.
There's no point wasting your time on someone that is just a total waste of space...
He was trumpeting his loyalty and duty - those concepts don't stop when someone is a dead loss. They certainly haven't stopped in Sunak's case, and there are few losses deader than that.
The mention of Angela Rayner in the Hands begging bowl email is interesting.
There is something about her that really triggers something primordial and uncomfortable among gammonflakes. A working class woman who left school at 16 - because she was *pregnant*. And now, bold as brass, having opinions in public!
And then the whole weird Basic Instinct accusations. There’s a strange, roiling stew of classism and sexism bubbling away there. Genuinely fascinating.
Other than the FT, newspaper front pages ignore politics and are 100% coronation.
Just as planned by the powers that be when they scheduled tomorrow's nonsense.
I'm sure you're joking, since that would undermine the impact of local election losses how? The change has occurred, anyone who didn't notice but capable of noticing will still find a way to know.
Rishi Sunak depicted as a turnip on the front of a tabloid would reach the places PB doesn't reach.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Well done... I've done something similar - been offered and accepted a full time job in the public sector even though it means a pay cut. I took a break from it for a couple of years after getting fed up with the dysfunctionality of the public sector. I found that a) I am not motivated to make money despite lots of opportunities to do so and b) after a while you want to stick at doing one thing, work in a solid team etc, rather than hopping around, and c) no job is a life sentence and there are always alternatives.
Yeah. Do you know what? After going on supply last September I discovered that finding a line manager who I could not design to be more supportive, nor more likeable as a person, nor better at her job, is worth many £1000's a year. In fact it's priceless. I want to go to work for her. Cos she's great. She's stifled by lunatic decisions from higher up of course. We have laughter daily about the ludicrosity of it all. And have each others' backs. I like her very much. I would never have applied for permanent otherwise. One of the things you realise with age if you're lucky I guess.
All that being said, over the last few days Sir Keir has come up with some things that make me start to believe that maybe he does have a clue - so maybe it'll all be moot in the end. He absolutely has to use this as a springboard to put forward a manifesto to improve the country on his own terms, and to get a big enough majority to implement it. The Tories aren't going to win the next election, so the country needs Labour to be strong and effective in government. A hung parliament doesn't help anyone.
It's coming, Driver, that manifesto. Just try and hang on a little longer if you can.
The other thing, about rejoining the public sector, is that it is good to go back in and challenge extreme socially progressive initiatives in government. I've accepted a role in an organisation that is oestensibly very 'woke' but my experience is that, aside from a small minority, the people who work there don't actually buy in to it.
These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.
They matter to you at times. They didn't matter to you when it came to Truss, and it hasn't escaped my notice that even now when she makes a high profile speech supporting your personal hobby horse (pushing back against woke), you don't have the balls to comment in its favour. I am afraid I see little to admire in your insistence on lashing yourself to the mast of sinking Sunak, it just strikes me as pigheaded pride; an inability to accept that you backed a dud.
Sunak is definitely an asset to the Conservatives at this point. Obviously counter-factuals are difficult but I think the tories are in a far better position than had they stuck with Liz Truss, despite her 'anti-woke' credentials.
Especially as only a tiny fraction of voters give a fig's whig about Woke. At least according to polling.
The other thing, about rejoining the public sector, is that it is good to go back in and challenge extreme socially progressive initiatives in government. I've accepted a role in an organisation that is oestensibly very 'woke' but my experience is that, aside from a small minority, the people who work there don't actually buy in to it.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Well done... I've done something similar - been offered and accepted a full time job in the public sector even though it means a pay cut. I took a break from it for a couple of years after getting fed up with the dysfunctionality of the public sector. I found that a) I am not motivated to make money despite lots of opportunities to do so and b) after a while you want to stick at doing one thing, work in a solid team etc, rather than hopping around, and c) no job is a life sentence and there are always alternatives.
Yeah. Do you know what? After going on supply last September I discovered that finding a line manager who I could not design to be more supportive, nor more likeable as a person, nor better at her job, is worth many £1000's a year. In fact it's priceless. I want to go to work for her. Cos she's great. She's stifled by lunatic decisions from higher up of course. We have laughter daily about the ludicrosity of it all. And have each others' backs. I like her very much. I would never have applied for permanent otherwise. One of the things you realise with age if you're lucky I guess.
Nonsense, we should all be working 100 hours a week powered by cocaine in the City so we can become multi millionaires who talk about mergers and multi-purpose tax liquidation initiatives or whatever.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
Starmer’s shit scared of being accused of wanting to reverse Brexit. He’s spiking the client press’s guns on this issue, and not scaring the Red Wall knuckle-draggers in the process.
It’s not pretty, it’s not inspiring, but as long as it gets these venal, immoral bastards out, I, and many on the left, can live with that. A soupçon of Lib Demmish Euro love would be very welcome.
There’ll be lots of lovely Labour policies, I don’t doubt that, but they have to be pragmatic and not give the Mail, Telegraph, GB News, Matt Goodwin right wing circle jerk society any anti-Brexit shite to gorge on. Because it seems that Starmer is so sensible that there’s probably not a lot else they can blow out of all proportion. He certainly won’t be having any bacon sandwiches.
I've said before, I bow to no one in my remainerism. I'd happily advocate for a European Federation, of which I would wish the UK is a part, but I'd rather see Starmer as PM than see him lose by promising to reverse Brexit. He has my vote.*
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
Starmer’s shit scared of being accused of wanting to reverse Brexit. He’s spiking the client press’s guns on this issue, and not scaring the Red Wall knuckle-draggers in the process.
It’s not pretty, it’s not inspiring, but as long as it gets these venal, immoral bastards out, I, and many on the left, can live with that. A soupçon of Lib Demmish Euro love would be very welcome.
There’ll be lots of lovely Labour policies, I don’t doubt that, but they have to be pragmatic and not give the Mail, Telegraph, GB News, Matt Goodwin right wing circle jerk society any anti-Brexit shite to gorge on. Because it seems that Starmer is so sensible that there’s probably not a lot else they can blow out of all proportion. He certainly won’t be having any bacon sandwiches.
I've said before, I bow to no one in my remainerism. I'd happily advocate for a European Federation, of which I would wish the UK is a part, but I'd rather see Starmer as PM than see him lose by promising to reverse Brexit. He has my vote.*
*I've never voted for the winning party at a GE
That is a most disturbing addendum there! We'll know who to blame if it goes pear.
Anyways. I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September. This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday. And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge. Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?" The outstanding candidate. Best interview. Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
Well done... I've done something similar - been offered and accepted a full time job in the public sector even though it means a pay cut. I took a break from it for a couple of years after getting fed up with the dysfunctionality of the public sector. I found that a) I am not motivated to make money despite lots of opportunities to do so and b) after a while you want to stick at doing one thing, work in a solid team etc, rather than hopping around, and c) no job is a life sentence and there are always alternatives.
Yeah. Do you know what? After going on supply last September I discovered that finding a line manager who I could not design to be more supportive, nor more likeable as a person, nor better at her job, is worth many £1000's a year. In fact it's priceless. I want to go to work for her. Cos she's great. She's stifled by lunatic decisions from higher up of course. We have laughter daily about the ludicrosity of it all. And have each others' backs. I like her very much. I would never have applied for permanent otherwise. One of the things you realise with age if you're lucky I guess.
Yeah that's great. These are important factors. Some teams in the public sector are like this, I've seen it. Personally I had a bit of a different experience. I found that I could deal with whatever 'manager' I was assigned to. But then I had no motivation to challenge or improve anything, which I found unsatisfactory.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
Firstly, people voting tactically helps Labour as some of those tactical votes are FOR Labour in seats where they are challengers.
Secondly, it's a nice back up if Labour fail to get a majority for there to be a reasonably large number of Lib Dem seats.
Thirdly, say Labour get 350 seats to win a majority... they'd much rather the Conservatives had 220 of the remaining seats than 250 (say) as their main opposition has a mountain to climb to get back.
Fourthly, having a serious fight in the Surrey and elsewhere prevents the Conservatives pivoting to a full frontal red wall defence - they have to fight a war on two fronts and can't afford to offend their SE England base to try to hold the new and very different seats they gained in 2019. So that helps Labour win more of their targets.
So lots of reasons why Labour should welcome tactical voting... and even more reason the Tories should fear it, of course.
Matt Goodwin hesitantly sits on the fence on the subject of whether the Tories are diabolically or merely catastrophically bad. He doesn't outline how anyone might have done different in any sort of detail. Worth reading for a line on what thoughtful Tory friends are feeling.
Conclusion: being a politics prof is easier than having to run a country.
The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.
Under Corbyn, Labour activists and some Labour voters were as keen if not more keen to smash the Tory-enabling yellow scum.
Under Starmer, they are delighted to see a pincer movement so long as they are (and they certainly are) the big pincer in the north and midlands, while Lib Dems and Greens are the little pincer, holding down the Tories in areas which aren't realistically going Labour anyway, and preventing them pivoting firmly to voters in the red wall.
You're heading for a big tactical vote-fest when the General Election dawns, mark my words.
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
Starmer’s shit scared of being accused of wanting to reverse Brexit. He’s spiking the client press’s guns on this issue, and not scaring the Red Wall knuckle-draggers in the process.
It’s not pretty, it’s not inspiring, but as long as it gets these venal, immoral bastards out, I, and many on the left, can live with that. A soupçon of Lib Demmish Euro love would be very welcome.
There’ll be lots of lovely Labour policies, I don’t doubt that, but they have to be pragmatic and not give the Mail, Telegraph, GB News, Matt Goodwin right wing circle jerk society any anti-Brexit shite to gorge on. Because it seems that Starmer is so sensible that there’s probably not a lot else they can blow out of all proportion. He certainly won’t be having any bacon sandwiches.
I've said before, I bow to no one in my remainerism. I'd happily advocate for a European Federation, of which I would wish the UK is a part, but I'd rather see Starmer as PM than see him lose by promising to reverse Brexit. He has my vote.*
*I've never voted for the winning party at a GE
That is a most disturbing addendum there! We'll know who to blame if it goes pear.
Well, there's a first time for everything! Tbf, this is the first time I feel like I might actually vote for the winner, so that's something.
Matt Goodwin hesitantly sits on the fence on the subject of whether the Tories are diabolically or merely catastrophically bad. He doesn't outline how anyone might have done different in any sort of detail. Worth reading for a line on what thoughtful Tory friends are feeling.
Conclusion: being a politics prof is easier than having to run a country.
Does he conclude that the Tories did badly because they didn't talk enough about immigration?
It's true that the Tories have utterly failed on the topic of immigration.
Well. What do they want? Hugely reduced immigration. But real terms public sector pay cuts and simultaneously no public sector labour shortages. No surprise they can't square that circle.
As anticipated, the scale of these losses and opposition celebration means anything they may have said about the voter ID changes has been pretty much lost.
It won't be a priority to fix - after all, after the next GE the system in place will have produced a new government, so how bad could it be?
NEW: Conservatives lose their majority on mid-Sussex to NOC. Lib Dems now the biggest group. Conservatives down 11. Lib Dems up 8.
Real discontent in True Blue world, has been brewing ever since Johnson arrived frankly.
Take a look at the councils which have gone NOC. On so many of them it is very clear that it won't be a Tory minority administration. They are out...
In a lot of the South I think water pollution has been a real galvanising force. Ignored by the government but extremely salient. Only the Lib Dems and Greens have bothered to make anything of it.
It’s a perfect Lib Dem/Green issue/policy.
It’s Clegg/tuition fees, all over again.
“Do you want to tax people, to the tune of hundred billion quid, in order to stop 0.1% of our sewage going into rivers/the sea?”
I don’t know the figures, but they can’t be far off.
LOL. Do we want water quality at around the EU average? Yes, we do.
Oooh. Starmer would love that for his leaflets: “we’re going FORCE the water companies to BEAT the EU average for water quality!” Or somesuch.
If he can get it past Rachel Reeves, that kind of policy/spinning could be really electorally effective.
We’re back to the basic problem, though. It’s fking expensive to sort out.
Profit before people:
"over £ 18.1 billion was paid out to shareholders of the nine large English regional water and sewerage companies between 2007 and 2016"
With I suspect most of that £25 coming from business use rather than domestic use.
Of course if anyone is upset about that level of profit then all they need to do is spend about £100bn to buy the water companies and then reduce prices fractionally so that no profits are made.
But it doesn't seem like the most worthwhile potential investment to me.
As anticipated, the scale of these losses and opposition celebration means anything they may have said about the voter ID changes has been pretty much lost.
It won't be a priority to fix - after all, after the next GE the system in place will have produced a new government, so how bad could it be?
I would be amazed if a Labour government gets rid of photo ID for voting. I hope they do though.
Comments
Labour 48, Con 27, Libdem 7 etc?
I got a full time, permanent post at my school today for next September.
This was despite dropping an entire tin of hot Scotch broth over myself 20 minutes before the final interview yesterday.
And despite the Head coming in halfway through with two reporters from ITV and starting to give them the full tour of our brand new music lodge.
Before suddenly saying "Oh. Are the interviews in here?"
The outstanding candidate. Best interview.
Am chuffed. Validation. And security. If a pay cut.
"over £ 18.1 billion was paid out to shareholders of the nine large English regional water and sewerage companies between 2007 and 2016"
https://www.waternewseurope.com/privatised-water-companies-awash-with-debt-in-england-and-wales-as-dividends-flow-to-shareholders/
Besides, if the Lib Dems are in coalition Starmer, with crocodile tears, can point to a concerted pitch back towards Europe as the price the Lib Dems demand. It should anchor Labour to the centre, the Continuity Corbynites can be happily ignored.
Win/win, innit?
I guess this shouldn't be a surprise - the BBC's royal coverage is always so nauseatingly sycophantic it must make even the most ardent monarchist want to throw up.
Anyway, sincere congratulations.
The question was why do you feel that you have a duty to vote Conservative? This is even though in your opinion they do nothing for you. The Communist Party of Britain probably does nothing for you too. Why not vote for them?
years away.
Time to return to the PB back-benches until the next interesting events whatever they turn out to be.
We've seen a number of left-leaning people on this thread not being inspired by Labour, not feeling like a Labour government will improve the country, and so on - and perhaps this is why: if your first priority is to be "anti them" not "pro you" then you're going to have problems.
As Cameron said about Ed Miliband: we all know what he's against, but what is he for?
From your output on here, you do seem like a very sensible, down to earth chap.
Exactly the kind of person that, I imagine, some kid who might not have had the greatest start in life, could look up to and inspire them make something of their lives and, when faced with the inevitable moral complexity that adulthood presents them with, make the right decisions.
They’re lucky to have you.
Guardian: "The Tories have lost 959 seats while Labour have gained 625 seats and the Lib Dems are +420."
Telegraph: the same.
BBC: "LAB +527; CON -1,061;LD +416"
Times: Con -1030; Lab +510
Why the different figures?
Feeling the validation all over.
Thank you. Hope so.
Here's the thing, though. I bet you ChatGPT wasn't doing it in real time. I bet that they analysed the headlines, said we should have bought [x] at the time the article was published. And I'm sure that's right.
But in the real world there are already hedge funds running billions of dollars that have finely tuned sentiment analysis that make decisions in thousandths of a second.
I'd also ask if the analysis included any trading or custody costs: because it's very easy to beat an investment fund with a paper portfolio, when you don't have any of the actual costs incurred by trading shares.
Stopping the Tories fucking up the country, enriching their mates and behaving like they are born to rule is my priority.
And so offputting.
I really hope Sir Keir doesn't fall into this way of thinking.
It’s not pretty, it’s not inspiring, but as long as it gets these venal, immoral bastards out, I, and many on the left, can live with that. A soupçon of Lib Demmish Euro love would be very welcome.
There’ll be lots of lovely Labour policies, I don’t doubt that, but they have to be pragmatic and not give the Mail, Telegraph, GB News, Matt Goodwin right wing circle jerk society any anti-Brexit shite to gorge on. Because it seems that Starmer is so sensible that there’s probably not a lot else they can blow out of all proportion. He certainly won’t be having any bacon sandwiches.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-65147839
I've done something similar - been offered and accepted a full time job in the public sector even though it means a pay cut.
I took a break from it for a couple of years after getting fed up with the dysfunctionality of the public sector. I found that a) I am not motivated to make money despite lots of opportunities to do so and b) after a while you want to stick at doing one thing, work in a solid team etc, rather than hopping around, and c) no job is a life sentence and there are always alternatives.
So your "bare minimum" would be the second best result of recent times. (And that time was achieved when a terrorist loving anti-Semite Marxist was the leader of the opposition.)
Somewhat off-message.
Flags also flying in the pub and outside the Prod church. And one neighbour has union jack bunting.
Well done LAB, LD, GRN. Good results for all of you.
Not so good for CON but it's not over yet!
Enjoy the Coronation goodnight all 👍
Obviously counter-factuals are difficult but I think the tories are in a far better position than had they stuck with Liz Truss, despite her 'anti-woke' credentials.
Just as planned by the powers that be when they scheduled tomorrow's nonsense.
CR could agree with her entire policy platform it wouldn't matter because she's a complete and utter non-starter.
There's no point wasting your time on someone that is just a total waste of space...
*I've never voted for the winning party at a GE
There is something about her that really triggers something primordial and uncomfortable among gammonflakes. A working class woman who left school at 16 - because she was *pregnant*. And now, bold as brass, having opinions in public!
And then the whole weird Basic Instinct accusations. There’s a strange, roiling stew of classism and sexism bubbling away there. Genuinely fascinating.
Anyway, time for my bed.
After going on supply last September I discovered that finding a line manager who I could not design to be more supportive, nor more likeable as a person, nor better at her job, is worth many £1000's a year. In fact it's priceless.
I want to go to work for her. Cos she's great. She's stifled by lunatic decisions from higher up of course. We have laughter daily about the ludicrosity of it all. And have each others' backs. I like her very much. I would never have applied for permanent otherwise.
One of the things you realise with age if you're lucky I guess.
Personally I had a bit of a different experience. I found that I could deal with whatever 'manager' I was assigned to. But then I had no motivation to challenge or improve anything, which I found unsatisfactory.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/results
Wragg and Robinson will surely start working on their LinkedIn profiles now.
Secondly, it's a nice back up if Labour fail to get a majority for there to be a reasonably large number of Lib Dem seats.
Thirdly, say Labour get 350 seats to win a majority... they'd much rather the Conservatives had 220 of the remaining seats than 250 (say) as their main opposition has a mountain to climb to get back.
Fourthly, having a serious fight in the Surrey and elsewhere prevents the Conservatives pivoting to a full frontal red wall defence - they have to fight a war on two fronts and can't afford to offend their SE England base to try to hold the new and very different seats they gained in 2019. So that helps Labour win more of their targets.
So lots of reasons why Labour should welcome tactical voting... and even more reason the Tories should fear it, of course.
It would be unforgivable to split the votes and allow the Tories to benefit .
No 1 priority must be to remove the Tories and stop them from doing further damage to the country.
Con +16
Lab -18
LD +3
Ind -1
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E06000039
Christ.
That’s a proper arse-kicking of epic proportions.
What do they want?
Hugely reduced immigration. But real terms public sector pay cuts and simultaneously
no public sector labour shortages.
No surprise they can't square that circle.
Though in the case of the former areas vote back in those involved in massive scandals all the time of course - look at Luftur Rahman.
Council leader Phelim Mac Caffety and deputy leader Hannah Allbrooke have lost their seats amid a Labour landslide across the council.
The pair had served as councillors in Brunswick and Adelaide, but have been ousted by Labour candidates Andrei Czolak and Jilly Stevens.
Ms Allbrooke lost by just six votes in the ward, while Mr Mac Cafferty slumped to just 901 votes.
https://www.theargus.co.uk/news/23504524.brighton-election-green-council-leader-loses-seat-labour/
Every vote counts…..
It won't be a priority to fix - after all, after the next GE the system in place will have produced a new government, so how bad could it be?
Or about £25 per person.
With I suspect most of that £25 coming from business use rather than domestic use.
Of course if anyone is upset about that level of profit then all they need to do is spend about £100bn to buy the water companies and then reduce prices fractionally so that no profits are made.
But it doesn't seem like the most worthwhile potential investment to me.
holy crap Trump mistook E Jean Carroll for his ex-wife Marla Maples during his deposition
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1654552867972214786
But now Labour have to seal the deal.