LAB has 9% lead in BBC Projected National Share – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
There's more to environmentalism than CO2.EPG said:
Environmental issues is a bit much. Tractor country didn't vote for net zero.Ghedebrav said:What an absolute pasting.
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’.0 -
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.3 -
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.Driver said:
Here's another Labour supporter cheering "anti-Tory" not Labour successes.Northern_Al said: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?
1 -
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 ieSouthamObserver said:
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!kamski said:
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.SouthamObserver said:The specific Omnisis local election poll was almost exactly the same as the NEV projection.
https://twitter.com/Omnisis/status/1654529863879933952
The latest Omnisis national poll - out today - has a 21 point Labour lead.
https://twitter.com/Omnisis/status/1654487077138968579
Labour 48, Con 27, Libdem 7 etc?
0 -
Personally I'd rather a minority government of Labour/Lib Dems.1
-
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 1997.5
-
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.0 -
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.0 -
Oh do sod off you miserable, negative git. I'm more than happy with Labour's performance.Driver said:
Here's another Labour supporter cheering "anti-Tory" not Labour successes.Northern_Al said: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?0 -
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.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.0 -
He was replying to my point that a number of Labour supporters have, very notably, been cheering "anti-Tory" results not Labour results.Gallowgate said:
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.0 -
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.35 -
Only if they fail in their own targets.Ghedebrav said:
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.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.0 -
It's crap, but it needs good people. Well done.dixiedean said: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.2 -
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.Gallowgate said: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.
3 -
Profit before people:ping said:
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.TimS said:
LOL. Do we want water quality at around the EU average? Yes, we do.ping said:
It’s a perfect Lib Dem/Green issue/policy.TimS said:
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.RochdalePioneers said:
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...Dialup said: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.
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.
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.
"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/1 -
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.Driver said:
He was replying to my point that a number of Labour supporters have, very notably, been cheering "anti-Tory" results not Labour results.Gallowgate said:
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.0 -
Just get the bastards out. They’ve done enough damage. If it means a coalition, who cares? Tribalism’s bollocks.Driver said:
He was replying to my point that a number of Labour supporters have, very notably, been cheering "anti-Tory" results not Labour results.Gallowgate said:
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?5 -
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/05/revealed-royal-family-has-power-to-censor-bbc-coronation-coverage
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.0 -
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.3 -
Congratulations. And I think a later in life career change for.you?dixiedean said: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.1 -
Our aim is for Rishi Sunak to drive to Buckingham Palace and advise the king to invite Sir Keir Starmer to form a government.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.3 -
Same as I cheer Sunderland losing.Driver said:
He was replying to my point that a number of Labour supporters have, very notably, been cheering "anti-Tory" results not Labour results.Gallowgate said:
I don't believe that SirNorfolkPassmore speaks for the Labour Party, although I may be wrong.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.0 -
Also validates HYUFD's theory about the efficacy of broth ?dixiedean said: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.
Anyway, sincere congratulations.1 -
Will they unleash The Witchell ?kamski said:https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/05/revealed-royal-family-has-power-to-censor-bbc-coronation-coverage
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.0 -
Those values matter to most of us. It's good that they matter to you, but that doesn't make you special.Casino_Royale said:
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.Benpointer said:
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.Casino_Royale said:These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
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?
4 -
They roo this confusion.bondegezou said:
Indeed. The third leg, however, points backwards and is often mistaken for a tail.ydoethur said:
Do they have three legs?bondegezou said:
... and in Scotland and the Isle of Man: https://ptes.org/get-informed/facts-figures/red-necked-wallaby/Jim_Miller said:There are wild wallabies in France, not far from Paris: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_kangaroo
Obviously, the ones on the Isle of Man have no tails.0 -
Congratulations. And good luck.dixiedean said: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.3 -
Cheers. Something I've gone back to after manyFF43 said:
Congratulations. And I think a later in life career change for.you?dixiedean said: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.
years away.1 -
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.0 -
You can walk from Dover to Lancaster without going through a single Tory district council today.1
-
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?0 -
Congratulations!dixiedean said: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.
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.3 -
This is a bit odd.
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?1 -
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.0
-
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.Driver said:
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?0 -
Guardian and Tele journos stopped counting and went to the pub at 7pm?Benpointer said:This is a bit odd.
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?1 -
Gosh. Cheers. How kind.ping said:
Congratulations!dixiedean said: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.
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.
Feeling the validation all over.
Thank you. Hope so.2 -
It's to do with counting intervening by-elections. Or just using the 2019 results as a baseline for a gain or loss.Benpointer said:This is a bit odd.
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?2 -
They've recreated Marshall Wace, then, only using ChatGPT.geoffw said:
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:rcs1000 said:
Selection bias.geoffw said: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.
It wouldn’t “be long until large numbers of consumers try to use [ChatGPT] for financial gain,” Jon Ostler, Finder’s CEO, said in a statement earlier this week.
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/05/investing/chatgpt-outperforms-investment-funds/index.html
All the studies showing shitty perfomance for baskets of stocks picked by ChatGPT have been discarded.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4412788
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.
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.2 -
I don't expect us to win a majority. If we do, that would be a Brucie Bonus.Driver said:
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?
Stopping the Tories fucking up the country, enriching their mates and behaving like they are born to rule is my priority.2 -
Does he conclude that the Tories did badly because they didn't talk enough about immigration?algarkirk said: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.
https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/the-party-that-never-made-a-choice?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email1 -
Negative, negative, negative.SandyRentool said:
I don't expect us to win a majority. If we do, that would be a Brucie Bonus.Driver said:
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?
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.0 -
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.Driver said:
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?
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.0 -
If anybody wants to timeline the events from yesterday-today, here's the BBC live coverage
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-651478390 -
[this comment left intentionally blank]
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?Benpointer said:This is a bit odd.
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?1 -
Well done...dixiedean said: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'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.4 -
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.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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.)1 -
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.
0 -
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.Casino_Royale said:
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.Benpointer said:
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.Casino_Royale said:These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.2 -
Love me a bit of blue on blue, woof woof!Luckyguy1983 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.Benpointer said:
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.Casino_Royale said:These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.0 -
It's a good idea to keep his job options open at this time.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
What a bastard, doing honest Deliveroo riders out of a job.Dialup said:https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1654502460013318144
The Prime Minister Rishi Sunak delivered takeaways to Conservative HQ on the morning after local elections1 -
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.rcs1000 said:
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.Driver said:
This should not be Labour's ambition. They should be aiming for 350 seats at a bare minimum.Ghedebrav said:
Helps the Conservatives *not* get one though, and in a hung parliament helps Lab get a plurality.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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.)0 -
Ok looks like that's (nearly) it then!
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 👍0 -
Right, bedtime for me. I won't be on much over the weekend, I expect - enjoy the festivities/football/word-beginning-with-F of your choice!0
-
Sunak is definitely an asset to the Conservatives at this point.Luckyguy1983 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.Benpointer said:
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.Casino_Royale said:These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
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.0 -
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.3 -
Liz is a dead loss.Luckyguy1983 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.Benpointer said:
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.Casino_Royale said:These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
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...0 -
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.londonpubman said:Ok looks like that's (nearly) it then!
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 👍0 -
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.*northern_monkey said:
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.Driver said:
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?
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 never voted for the winning party at a GE1 -
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.SandyRentool said: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.0 -
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.GIN1138 said:
Liz is a dead loss.Luckyguy1983 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.Benpointer said:
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.Casino_Royale said:These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
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...0 -
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.8 -
Rishi Sunak depicted as a turnip on the front of a tabloid would reach the places PB doesn't reach.kle4 said:
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.SandyRentool said: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.
Anyway, time for my bed.1 -
Yeah. Do you know what?darkage said:
Well done...dixiedean said: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'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.
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.
4 -
It's coming, Driver, that manifesto. Just try and hang on a little longer if you can.Driver said: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.
1 -
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.0
-
Especially as only a tiny fraction of voters give a fig's whig about Woke. At least according to polling.darkage said:
Sunak is definitely an asset to the Conservatives at this point.Luckyguy1983 said:
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.Casino_Royale said:
Loyalty and duty really matter to me as values.Benpointer said:
Why do you feel you have a duty to them? Genuine question.Casino_Royale said:These results are truly terrible for the Conservatives, no question.
I only really voted for them out of duty. They do nothing for me.
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.0 -
Is it The Metropolitan Police?darkage said: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.
4 -
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.dixiedean said:
Yeah. Do you know what?darkage said:
Well done...dixiedean said: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'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.
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.0 -
Name well chosen, obviously.Unpopular said:
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.*northern_monkey said:
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.Driver said:
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?
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 never voted for the winning party at a GE1 -
That is a most disturbing addendum there! We'll know who to blame if it goes pear.Unpopular said:
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.*northern_monkey said:
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.Driver said:
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?
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 never voted for the winning party at a GE1 -
Yeah that's great. These are important factors. Some teams in the public sector are like this, I've seen it.dixiedean said:
Yeah. Do you know what?darkage said:
Well done...dixiedean said: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'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.
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.2 -
0
-
Final observation: for the first time in the history of the council, Stockport doesn’t have a single Conservative councillor.
Wragg and Robinson will surely start working on their LinkedIn profiles now.1 -
Firstly, people voting tactically helps Labour as some of those tactical votes are FOR Labour in seats where they are challengers.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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.4 -
Slackers!Andy_JS said:Still 2 councils to declare.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/results
2 -
Labour and the Lib Dems need to just put up paper candidates in certain seats .
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.1 -
It's true that the Tories have utterly failed on the topic of immigration.rcs1000 said:
Does he conclude that the Tories did badly because they didn't talk enough about immigration?algarkirk said: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.
https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/the-party-that-never-made-a-choice?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email0 -
What on earth happened in Slough?
Con +16
Lab -18
LD +3
Ind -1
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E060000390 -
1,100 losses.
Christ.
That’s a proper arse-kicking of epic proportions.4 -
The council went bankrupt and voters punished Labour big time !Andy_JS said:What on earth happened in Slough?
Con +16
Lab -18
LD +3
Ind -1
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E060000393 -
I think some councils tried that yesterday- and it worked.nico679 said:Labour and the Lib Dems need to just put up paper candidates in certain seats .
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.1 -
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.kinabalu said:
That is a most disturbing addendum there! We'll know who to blame if it goes pear.Unpopular said:
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.*northern_monkey said:
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.Driver said:
Surely the priority for Labour is to win a Labour majority.SandyRentool said:
They help defeat the Tories. And that is the first priority.Driver said:
You do realise that LD gains from the Tories don't help SKS get a majority, right?SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Again, that is the massive, flashing danger sign for the Tories.Driver said:The most notable thing in recent hours, perhaps, has been Labour supporters celebrating "anti-Tory" voting not pro-Labour voting.
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.
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?
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 never voted for the winning party at a GE1 -
Well.Andy_JS said:
It's true that the Tories have utterly failed on the topic of immigration.rcs1000 said:
Does he conclude that the Tories did badly because they didn't talk enough about immigration?algarkirk said: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.
https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/the-party-that-never-made-a-choice?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
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.2 -
Mid Suffolk being a case in point.Anabobazina said:
I think some councils tried that yesterday- and it worked.nico679 said:Labour and the Lib Dems need to just put up paper candidates in certain seats .
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.1 -
Surely Starmer is savvy enough to realize that . I hope so !Anabobazina said:
I think some councils tried that yesterday- and it worked.nico679 said:Labour and the Lib Dems need to just put up paper candidates in certain seats .
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.1 -
They're either involved in a massive scandal or the residents of Slough are the biggest contrarians of all time.Andy_JS said:What on earth happened in Slough?
Con +16
Lab -18
LD +3
Ind -1
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E06000039
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.1 -
It's been a terrrrrrrrrrrrrrrible night for the Tories...Anabobazina said:1,100 losses.
Christ.
That’s a proper arse-kicking of epic proportions.3 -
What the Greens aren’t mentioning:
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…..0 -
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?0 -
So less than £2bn per year.Benpointer said:
Profit before people:ping said:
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.TimS said:
LOL. Do we want water quality at around the EU average? Yes, we do.ping said:
It’s a perfect Lib Dem/Green issue/policy.TimS said:
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.RochdalePioneers said:
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...Dialup said: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.
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.
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.
"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/
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.0 -
This is a deposition under oath ?
holy crap Trump mistook E Jean Carroll for his ex-wife Marla Maples during his deposition
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/16545528679722147860 -
Beth Rigby on Sky actually dared to use that exact line at lunchtime today. A great tribute to the great man.GIN1138 said:
It's be terrrrrrrrrrrrrrrible night for the Tories...Anabobazina said:1,100 losses.
Christ.
That’s a proper arse-kicking of epic proportions.
But now Labour have to seal the deal.3 -
Apparently the council went bankrupt a couple of years ago.kle4 said:
They're either involved in a massive scandal or the residents of Slough are the biggest contrarians of all time.Andy_JS said:What on earth happened in Slough?
Con +16
Lab -18
LD +3
Ind -1
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E06000039
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.2 -
There will be more like them soon.Andy_JS said:
Apparently the council went bankrupt a couple of years ago.kle4 said:
They're either involved in a massive scandal or the residents of Slough are the biggest contrarians of all time.Andy_JS said:What on earth happened in Slough?
Con +16
Lab -18
LD +3
Ind -1
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E06000039
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.0 -
I would be amazed if a Labour government gets rid of photo ID for voting. I hope they do though.kle4 said: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?1 -
….0
