I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.
That would require a fair number of people who have switched from Conservative to Labour, according to polls, to switch back again, I think? What's the basis for them doing that?
Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.
The best bits are behind the paywall.
They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.
I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.
Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.
It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.
PB is smarter than these people.
Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.
I’ll start;
1. Section 28 and its political legacy.
1. Section 28 and its political legacy. 2. The Libdem map of net gains that @IanB2 posted
Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.
The best bits are behind the paywall.
They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.
I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.
Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.
It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.
PB is smarter than these people.
Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.
I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.
That would require a fair number of people who have switched from Conservative to Labour, according to polls, to switch back again, I think? What's the basis for them doing that?
Cost of living crisis history by GE2024/5?
There would have been no cost of living crisis if Boris Johnson had appointed 30p Lee Anderson as Chancellor instead of Rishi.
I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.
That would require a fair number of people who have switched from Conservative to Labour, according to polls, to switch back again, I think? What's the basis for them doing that?
It doesn’t necessarily require that. The churn is more than movement between the two main parties.
Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.
The best bits are behind the paywall.
They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.
I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.
Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.
It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.
PB is smarter than these people.
Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.
I’ll start;
1. Section 28 and its political legacy.
2. It's a cultural appeal which has some effectiveness, not something on which an entire campaign can rest.
3. Cultural issues have much more salience, and much more polarisation, in the US than in the UK.
Doesn’t mean that Matt Walsh’s famous question “What is a woman?” Won’t turn up in a British election debate though. Sunak’s answer is “adult human female”, how will others answer that question?
It does actually have value - it’s an official body which has confidentiality obligations attached. So it is commonly used to brief the LOTO and other senior opposition politicians when the government needs to share privileged information.
Could you replicate this some other way - sure - but what fun would that be? Do you need the “rarely right and never honourable” honorific? Of course not, but who does it harm? Membership should probably be time-limited though rather than for life as it is at the moment… although technically most of the stuff happens through sub-committees of the privy counsel (IIRC the Cabinet is technically a sub-committee of the Privy Counsel, while the prime minister is merely the chair of said sub-committee
It does actually have value - it’s an official body which has confidentiality obligations attached. So it is commonly used to brief the LOTO and other senior opposition politicians when the government needs to share privileged information.
Could you replicate this some other way - sure - but what fun would that be? Do you need the “rarely right and never honourable” honorific? Of course not, but who does it harm? Membership should probably be time-limited though rather than for life as it is at the moment… although technically most of the stuff happens through sub-committees of the privy counsel (IIRC the Cabinet is technically a sub-committee of the Privy Counsel, while the prime minister is merely the chair of said sub-committee
After this weekend, we all know who is the Lord President of the Privy Council. (The lady with the nice dress and the big sword).
Local election results are not a good guide to national results. In the 2017 locals the Conservatives did very well, giving Theresa May the false confidence to call the 2017 GE, where Labour significantly outperformed expectations.
I really think this national equivalent idea should be treated as "just a bit of fun". Given the role that turnout and tactical voting play in the predictive accuracy of national voting intention figures, trying to correct the figures using local election results seems like a pretty bad idea.
Is this one of those things that everyone already knew but was not spoken of much despite not being hidden either? As I cannot swear to it but it feels like something that was already known. Ireland maintains a secret arrangement dating back to the Cold War era allowing the UK to police the country’s airspace despite concerns about the accord being raised over the years by Ministers and military officers, The Irish Times has learned.
The agreement was drafted in the early 1950s when relations between the west and the Soviet Union were at a low point, according to interviews with diplomatic, political and military figures.
It’s public domain. Basically allows RoI to get away with not having its own airforce - a cost saving measure. But it allows NATO to control the GIUK and the submarine routes into the North Atlantic more effectively
It does actually have value - it’s an official body which has confidentiality obligations attached. So it is commonly used to brief the LOTO and other senior opposition politicians when the government needs to share privileged information.
Could you replicate this some other way - sure - but what fun would that be? Do you need the “rarely right and never honourable” honorific? Of course not, but who does it harm? Membership should probably be time-limited though rather than for life as it is at the moment… although technically most of the stuff happens through sub-committees of the privy counsel (IIRC the Cabinet is technically a sub-committee of the Privy Counsel, while the prime minister is merely the chair of said sub-committee
I wasn't suggesting getting rid of the Privy Council. Just trimming down the people who were appointed as they were in the shadow cabinet 20 years ago for about 2 months or something, so we aren't expected to still call them Rt Honourable. No issue with all the present and recent ones getting a fancy honourific.
This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.
I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
I know.
I am duty bound to report this.
Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
The Tories gutted it.
I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.
A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
We had Liz Truss try it. Tories can never play that card again.
The Tories got rid of Truss after six weeks
Corbyn fought two elections (vigorously supported by SKS)
On the contrary, I am predicting an absolutely stonking Labour landslide. Why? All the conditions are there.
We have a tired, worn out Conservative government that has been in power for thirteen years. A government that gave us scandal after scandal under Boris, not to mention a party that foisted Liz Truss on us.
We have a labour leader who won't terrify people on the centre right. They might not vote for Starmer, but they may not feel strongly enough about him (as they did about Corbyn) to go out and vote.
The economy is likely to get worse, not better. Interest rates are likely to continue rising and as more people come off their fixed mortgage deals, that is going to hurt. Inflation certainly doesn't seem to be coming down yet. Property market looking toppy as well. Energy bills still a problem. Overall, people are going to feel even poorer this time next year.
Many people in the red wall loaned their votes to the Conservatives to "get Brexit done". Well, it's done now and many red wallers may return to Labour, particularly with the hated and perceived-as-unpatriotic Corbyn long gone.
The "stop the boats" nonsense is going to backfire. Immigration is continuing to increase under the Conservatives, so basing their campaign on this is going to make them look ridiculous.
The SNP have imploded. While Labour won't return to their pre-SNP position of dominance, they're poised to improve their performance. There's also no danger of the Conservatives running a "Starmer in Sturgeon's pocket" campaign.
Local election results are not a good guide to national results. In the 2017 locals the Conservatives did very well, giving Theresa May the false confidence to call the 2017 GE, where Labour significantly outperformed expectations.
Tactical voting and lending of votes between Labour and Lib Dem supporters will pile further pressure on the Conservatives.
Overall, the stage is set for a Labour majority - perhaps even a landslide. Against this, what do the Conservatives offer? A tired government led by the managerialist Sunak, who seems to have no solutions for either growth or reducing the tax burden.
In short, people will have a lot of reasons to vote Labour and few to vote Conservative. I have put my money where my mouth is and bet on a Labour majority accordingly.
Theresa May called the general election before the locals.
I’d expect the Conservatives to win 35% or so, at the GE, not 26%, and Labour to be about 40%.
That would require a fair number of people who have switched from Conservative to Labour, according to polls, to switch back again, I think? What's the basis for them doing that?
It’s a case of don’t knows/won’t knows coming back and some concluding better the devil you know. The same happened with Labour in the six months leading up to the 2010 GE.
This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.
I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
I know.
I am duty bound to report this.
Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
The Tories gutted it.
I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.
A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
We had Liz Truss try it. Tories can never play that card again.
The Tories got rid of Truss after six weeks
Corbyn fought two elections (vigorously supported by SKS)
You supported Liz Truss. Your judgment is poor.
JC never crashed the economy and jacked up my mortgage. Liz Truss did.
About 310 seats would be my my best guess for Labour.
Anything over 300 is a fabulous performance.
They are starting with slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010 but they are up against a more plausible leader in Sunak than Brown was by the end and and have a somewhat less plausible one of their own.
Can they do it? Absolutely. But it's not easy.
Wait.
Labour has slightly more seats than Cameron in 2010?
This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.
I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
I know.
I am duty bound to report this.
Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
The Tories gutted it.
I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.
A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
We had Liz Truss try it. Tories can never play that card again.
The Tories got rid of Truss after six weeks
Corbyn fought two elections (vigorously supported by SKS)
We’ll never know what the impact of Corbyn on people’s pockets would have been, although we can guess. The impact of Truss is still being felt.
This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.
I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
I know.
I am duty bound to report this.
Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
The Tories gutted it.
I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.
A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
We had Liz Truss try it. Tories can never play that card again.
The Tories got rid of Truss after six weeks
Corbyn fought two elections (vigorously supported by SKS)
This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.
I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
I know.
I am duty bound to report this.
Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
The Tories gutted it.
I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.
A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
We had Liz Truss try it. Tories can never play that card again.
The Tories got rid of Truss after six weeks
Corbyn fought two elections (vigorously supported by SKS)
You supported Liz Truss. Your judgment is poor.
JC never crashed the economy and jacked up my mortgage. Liz Truss did.
Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.
The best bits are behind the paywall.
They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.
I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.
Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.
It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.
PB is smarter than these people.
Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.
I’ll start;
1. Section 28 and its political legacy.
2. It's a cultural appeal which has some effectiveness, not something on which an entire campaign can rest.
3. Cultural issues have much more salience, and much more polarisation, in the US than in the UK.
Doesn’t mean that Matt Walsh’s famous question “What is a woman?” Won’t turn up in a British election debate though. Sunak’s answer is “adult human female”, how will others answer that question?
4. Many Tories don’t actually believe in all the anti-woke stuff themselves, and have personal and family experiences that mean some of it is objectionable to them.
Goodwin seems to assume all right wingers really think like him but just dare not say it out loud. A bit like some lefties think the country really wants a socialist utopia if only they weren’t compromised by false consciousness.
Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.
The best bits are behind the paywall.
They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.
I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.
Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.
It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.
PB is smarter than these people.
Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.
I’ll start;
1. Section 28 and its political legacy.
2. It's a cultural appeal which has some effectiveness, not something on which an entire campaign can rest.
3. Cultural issues have much more salience, and much more polarisation, in the US than in the UK.
Doesn’t mean that Matt Walsh’s famous question “What is a woman?” Won’t turn up in a British election debate though. Sunak’s answer is “adult human female”, how will others answer that question?
4. Many Tories don’t actually believe in all the anti-woke stuff themselves, and have personal and family experiences that mean some of it is objectionable to them.
Goodwin seems to assume all right wingers really think like him but just dare not say it out loud. A bit like some lefties think the country really wants a socialist utopia if only they weren’t compromised by false consciousness.
I thinkhe probably started out with some reasonable conclusions, at least from a particular political perspective, but he seems to have elevated it to nearly a religion - it is the cause of or answer to all problems that exist.
Listening to Louise Perry’s extended podcast with Matt Goodwin.
The best bits are behind the paywall.
They just can’t understand why the British conservatives are so reluctant to go full on anti-woke.
I can think of several reasons, none of which occur to either of them.
Interesting discussion, but the sheer lack of intellectual rigour has led me to cancel my subscription.
It’s interesting to know what these people think - and, at times they do make valid critiques of our political culture. But come on, guys. If you’re charging people money for your intellectual output, you need to be rigorous.
PB is smarter than these people.
Pretty sure we can come up with several good reasons as to why the Tory party is hesitant to go full on anti-woke.
I’ll start;
1. Section 28 and its political legacy.
2. It's a cultural appeal which has some effectiveness, not something on which an entire campaign can rest.
3. Cultural issues have much more salience, and much more polarisation, in the US than in the UK.
Doesn’t mean that Matt Walsh’s famous question “What is a woman?” Won’t turn up in a British election debate though. Sunak’s answer is “adult human female”, how will others answer that question?
4. Many Tories don’t actually believe in all the anti-woke stuff themselves, and have personal and family experiences that mean some of it is objectionable to them.
Goodwin seems to assume all right wingers really think like him but just dare not say it out loud. A bit like some lefties think the country really wants a socialist utopia if only they weren’t compromised by false consciousness.
I thinkhe probably started out with some reasonable conclusions, at least from a particular political perspective, but he seems to have elevated it to nearly a religion - it is the cause of or answer to all problems that exist.
He is just awful. He finds anything to support his POV and then pretends he is impartial. He is so utterly boring.
Two goal swing needed for Millwall now, else play off places are fixed.
I'll be rooting for Coventry this go. Would be great to see Robins at the club he will almost certainly be most associated with as a manager go through all 4 divisions.
I find the arguments against a Labour majority very unpersuasive.
The only possible way to read the LE results, even with all the caveats around them, is as a determination to punish the Tories.
The Rishi “bounce” - which is real - is not enough to compensate. His government looks increasingly irrelevant, and I think the debate will move on to what a Labour government might look like.
I think 35 is the Tory ceiling, but even if they narrow the gap to 7, ie Labour 42, I think tactical voting delivers a modest Labour majority.
Somehow the away trips to Millwall seem a little less scary now they no longer play at Cold Blow Lane. The mere name used to send chills down the spine, whatever one's reason for going there.
Like Mike I was dubious about Labour winning a majority but I'm experiencing rare self doubt now.
1) The Red Rose is going to be flower of Scotland if the SNP don't stop being a shit show
2) Last week confirmed the anyone but the Tories tactical voting coalition is back
My back of the fag packet calculations say Labour could win a majority with a 6-7% national lead.
Yep, I think a Labour majority is now more likely than I did. The scale of the anti-Tory voting was huge in the locals. If that carries over to a GE, it is bound to favour Labour most because Labour is second to the Tories in most constituencies.
SeanF’s 310 looks a fair number overall, but I would have said before that was a top end possibility. Now I’d make it a 50%+ chance, with a majority a 20% chance.
Something I've noticed with you, SO, terrific pundit that you are, is that on the domestic politics front you tend to overstate the chances of what you fear happening and understate the chances of what you're rooting for. The old 'emotional hedge' brain chemistry kicking in. I know it well since I'm prone to it myself. This, rather than its opposite of confirmation bias, is what I have to most fight when betting.
But if that's not what's occurring here, and 20% really is a fair assessment of the probability of a Labour majority, then laying it @ the current 1.9 represents absolutely stonking value!
Keir Starmer (41%, –) leads Rishi Sunak (35%, -2) by six points on the question of who would be the better Prime Minister at this moment.
Labour leader Keir Starmer’s net approval rating stands at +10%, the same as last week. 38% approve of Starmer’s job performance (-1), while 28% disapprove (-1).
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak receives a net approval rating of -7%, down two points from our poll last Sunday. Yesterday’s poll finds 33% approving of his overall job performance (-2) against 40% (–) disapproving.
48% expect a Labour victory in the next election, whereas 31% expect a Conservative victory in total.
This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.
I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
I know.
I am duty bound to report this.
Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
The Tories gutted it.
I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.
A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
Hey, I'm a Corbynite and know lots more, and I've never heard anyone say anything like that. Link please!
One minor correction - the Cons did NOT do better than their current polling. Lab's lead was smaller but owing to the fact the LDs and Greens did far better than their current polling. As they always do in Locals. Which is why you can't just calculate a UNS on the raw votes and expect it to play out that way at the GE. The real point is comparison with LEs of the past.. The two largest parties will NOT poll barely 60% at the next GE
Anyway - at the moment I know who are feeling better about their chances!
Lowest Labour % since 14 Aug (when Johnson was PM).
Westminster VI (7 May):
Labour 41% (-4) Conservative 29% (+1) Liberal Democrat 16% (+4) Reform UK 5% (-2) Green 4% (–) SNP 3% (+1) Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 30 April
I would suggest that would deliver a comfortable Labour majority.
Depends on the geography, and also depends how long the Lib Dems can stay in the news, but it's one of those curious results where a reduction in the Labour lead is probably bad news for the Conservatives.
Keir Starmer (41%, –) leads Rishi Sunak (35%, -2) by six points on the question of who would be the better Prime Minister at this moment.
Labour leader Keir Starmer’s net approval rating stands at +10%, the same as last week. 38% approve of Starmer’s job performance (-1), while 28% disapprove (-1).
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak receives a net approval rating of -7%, down two points from our poll last Sunday. Yesterday’s poll finds 33% approving of his overall job performance (-2) against 40% (–) disapproving.
48% expect a Labour victory in the next election, whereas 31% expect a Conservative victory in total.
SKS fans please explain the offside rule through the medium of interpretive dance.
I find the arguments against a Labour majority very unpersuasive.
The only possible way to read the LE results, even with all the caveats around them, is as a determination to punish the Tories.
The Rishi “bounce” - which is real - is not enough to compensate. His government looks increasingly irrelevant, and I think the debate will move on to what a Labour government might look like.
I think 35 is the Tory ceiling, but even if they narrow the gap to 7, ie Labour 42, I think tactical voting delivers a modest Labour majority.
I agree. As of now a modest Labour majority is the most likely outcome. And the chance of a big majority is greater than none at all.
At the top end of my expectation. But again it is the Tories that suffer here, not Labour.
Ed Davey has understood after a decade, which voters to target. It also helps that Lib Dem voters quite like Keir Starmer and the Tories keep going on about penises whilst destroying the economy.
That R&W poll suggests the Blue Wall might well crumble... certainly, Labour voters are definitely not reluctant now to lend their votes to the Yellow peril.
There really is a balance to this stuff. But I'd rather have the former than the latter.
This new attack has really hit home for me. We have an office, in Dallas, pretty close to that shopping centre, which I visited a few weeks ago.
This is not some backward, far right hicksville, this is a prosperous outer suburb. Hard to think of a London analogy but let’s go with Rayne’s Park or something.
We have folks who have relocated from other places to work in this office, and I wonder how they and their families are feeling.
We’ve just sent out a group email to that team. I’ll find out more when I check in with the office lead this afternoon.
That R&W poll suggests the Blue Wall might well crumble... certainly, Labour voters are definitely not reluctant now to lend their votes to the Yellow peril.
I wonder if time also plays a factor. I certainly am not detecting the same hatred of the Lib Dems from the younger group as I was even a few years ago.
I find the arguments against a Labour majority very unpersuasive.
The only possible way to read the LE results, even with all the caveats around them, is as a determination to punish the Tories.
The Rishi “bounce” - which is real - is not enough to compensate. His government looks increasingly irrelevant, and I think the debate will move on to what a Labour government might look like.
I think 35 is the Tory ceiling, but even if they narrow the gap to 7, ie Labour 42, I think tactical voting delivers a modest Labour majority.
I agree. As of now a modest Labour majority is the most likely outcome. And the chance of a big majority is greater than none at all.
I strongly disagree. The most likely outcome IMHO is Labour somewhere around 310 seats. Cameron couldn't do it on one go, I do not think Starmer will either.
But election after, he will get a big majority, if the Tories self-implode which seems likely.
At the top end of my expectation. But again it is the Tories that suffer here, not Labour.
Ed Davey has understood after a decade, which voters to target. It also helps that Lib Dem voters quite like Keir Starmer and the Tories keep going on about penises whilst destroying the economy.
Yes, it's only a subsample but it should be noted the R&W poll has Labour in the lead in Scotland. So the SNP result would be much worse than that.
That R&W poll suggests the Blue Wall might well crumble... certainly, Labour voters are definitely not reluctant now to lend their votes to the Yellow peril.
The Blue Wall will come back to the Tories, all it needs is for Rishi, Kemi, and Suella keep on talking more about the Woke.
That R&W poll suggests the Blue Wall might well crumble... certainly, Labour voters are definitely not reluctant now to lend their votes to the Yellow peril.
The Blue Wall will come back to the Tories, all it needs is for Rishi, Kemi, and Suella keep on talking more about the Woke.
The Tories seem to have lost touch with these voters. They really, really don't care about the woke issues, not the 25-45 age group anyway in these seats. These are the Tories of tomorrow yet they seem intent on telling them to vote Lib Dem instead. Odd.
There really is a balance to this stuff. But I'd rather have the former than the latter.
This new attack has really hit home for me. We have an office, in Dallas, pretty close to that shopping centre, which I visited a few weeks ago.
This is not some backward, far right hicksville, this is a prosperous outer suburb. Hard to think of a London analogy but let’s go with Rayne’s Park or something.
We have folks who have relocated from other places to work in this office, and I wonder how they and their families are feeling.
We’ve just sent out a group email to that team. I’ll find out more when I check in with the office lead this afternoon.
I don't wish to like this post but thank you for sharing your experience. Hope you are keeping ok in the circumstances.
My expectation is currently Labour at 330 +/- 15 seats, and the Tories at 230.
The LDs will be very lucky if they get to 35, just given the insane vote tallies they need to overcome in their target seats. The LD voter’s real contribution will be to tip the balance in Labour / Tory marginals.
That R&W poll suggests the Blue Wall might well crumble... certainly, Labour voters are definitely not reluctant now to lend their votes to the Yellow peril.
I wonder if time also plays a factor. I certainly am not detecting the same hatred of the Lib Dems from the younger group as I was even a few years ago.
More like a who? LD support in the under 30s is a fraction of what it was a generation ago.
This is such a health and safety/child endangerment violation that I regretfully have to report this to social services and the police.
I think he'd be in trouble even were George's hands not on the controls, but that they are? Naughty indeed.
I know.
I am duty bound to report this.
Who to though? Do we even have a public body which investigates alleged crimes anymore? I'm sure we used to have one, but I think thesedays they spend most of their time reading twitter or sniffing their own dirty laundrty.
The Tories gutted it.
I think in a hundred years austerity will be seen to be the biggest policy blunder of the 21st Century.
Until covid came along, no-one knew that the magic money tree was quite so tall.
It has always been possible to borrow lots of money. See WWII etc.
A favourite was Corbynites saying a) we should stop paying interest on the national debt to the bastard bankers b) we should borrow as much as we like, it’s a Right of The People.
Hey, I'm a Corbynite and know lots more, and I've never heard anyone say anything like that. Link please!
It's from the kind of people who think we could double spending on the NHS by cancelling Trident.
The sort of mirror reflection of the people who think we could cut tax in half, if we just fired half the civil service.
I find the arguments against a Labour majority very unpersuasive.
The only possible way to read the LE results, even with all the caveats around them, is as a determination to punish the Tories.
The Rishi “bounce” - which is real - is not enough to compensate. His government looks increasingly irrelevant, and I think the debate will move on to what a Labour government might look like.
I think 35 is the Tory ceiling, but even if they narrow the gap to 7, ie Labour 42, I think tactical voting delivers a modest Labour majority.
I agree. As of now a modest Labour majority is the most likely outcome. And the chance of a big majority is greater than none at all.
I strongly disagree. The most likely outcome IMHO is Labour somewhere around 310 seats. Cameron couldn't do it on one go, I do not think Starmer will either.
But election after, he will get a big majority, if the Tories self-implode which seems likely.
Cameron had one seat in Scotland though and was unable to win back many of the seats the Tories lost to the Lib Dems in 97, though. By contrast, Starmer will definitely have more seats in Scotland and there isn't a third party he has to win seats from south of the border.
Somebody posted earlier - as somebody posted here in 2019 - that the Lib Dems recorded some impressive seat numbers in 2019 but were just short of turning a lot of seats blue.
This is very similar to 2017 where May had a lot of swings in the Red Wall but just not quite enough to get across the line.
I cannot see how that situation will have got anything but better for the Lib Dems now.
We really could see a result much worse than 2019 and 1997 for the Tories.
There really is a balance to this stuff. But I'd rather have the former than the latter.
This new attack has really hit home for me. We have an office, in Dallas, pretty close to that shopping centre, which I visited a few weeks ago.
This is not some backward, far right hicksville, this is a prosperous outer suburb. Hard to think of a London analogy but let’s go with Rayne’s Park or something.
We have folks who have relocated from other places to work in this office, and I wonder how they and their families are feeling.
We’ve just sent out a group email to that team. I’ll find out more when I check in with the office lead this afternoon.
Is there any indication that the people are beginning to work out why these things happen with such regularity?
I note that the cops are looking at the culprits ideology. Might they not consider looking too at other ideologies, starting with the National Rifle Association?
At the top end of my expectation. But again it is the Tories that suffer here, not Labour.
Ed Davey has understood after a decade, which voters to target. It also helps that Lib Dem voters quite like Keir Starmer and the Tories keep going on about penises whilst destroying the economy.
Ed Davey is low profile, but an excellent organiser. We seem to be a competent party again.
There really is a balance to this stuff. But I'd rather have the former than the latter.
This new attack has really hit home for me. We have an office, in Dallas, pretty close to that shopping centre, which I visited a few weeks ago.
This is not some backward, far right hicksville, this is a prosperous outer suburb. Hard to think of a London analogy but let’s go with Rayne’s Park or something.
We have folks who have relocated from other places to work in this office, and I wonder how they and their families are feeling.
We’ve just sent out a group email to that team. I’ll find out more when I check in with the office lead this afternoon.
Is there any indication that the people are beginning to work out why these things happen with such regularity?
I note that the cops are looking at the culprits ideology. Might they not consider looking too at other ideologies, starting with the National Rifle Association?
Sadly not.
The cry on the right is we need more guns because if the victims were armed then they would have killed the perpetrators.
There's a universe in which the Tories do worse than 1997 purely because of tactical voting.
It is not my expectation - but it is a possibility.
Well when you have a crap voting system you've got to expect people to game it. The preconditions for doing so were never so favourable, so I agree. We could easily see a result heavily distorted by such voting.
There really is a balance to this stuff. But I'd rather have the former than the latter.
This new attack has really hit home for me. We have an office, in Dallas, pretty close to that shopping centre, which I visited a few weeks ago.
This is not some backward, far right hicksville, this is a prosperous outer suburb. Hard to think of a London analogy but let’s go with Rayne’s Park or something.
We have folks who have relocated from other places to work in this office, and I wonder how they and their families are feeling.
We’ve just sent out a group email to that team. I’ll find out more when I check in with the office lead this afternoon.
Is there any indication that the people are beginning to work out why these things happen with such regularity?
I note that the cops are looking at the culprits ideology. Might they not consider looking too at other ideologies, starting with the National Rifle Association?
I’m not an expert.
I struggle to make any sense, for example, of the polling that shows Biden losing to Trump and DeSantis.
I would like to just shrug and say, Americans are crazy, but it’s obviously more complicated than that.
Having said that, I finally finished “Before the Storm” by Rick Perlstein, which is an exceptional account of the ill-fated Goldwater Presidential run. It’s obvious there is has been a thick seam in quite bizarre political opinion in the USA since…forever.
There really is a balance to this stuff. But I'd rather have the former than the latter.
This new attack has really hit home for me. We have an office, in Dallas, pretty close to that shopping centre, which I visited a few weeks ago.
This is not some backward, far right hicksville, this is a prosperous outer suburb. Hard to think of a London analogy but let’s go with Rayne’s Park or something.
We have folks who have relocated from other places to work in this office, and I wonder how they and their families are feeling.
We’ve just sent out a group email to that team. I’ll find out more when I check in with the office lead this afternoon.
Is there any indication that the people are beginning to work out why these things happen with such regularity?
I note that the cops are looking at the culprits ideology. Might they not consider looking too at other ideologies, starting with the National Rifle Association?
Sadly not.
The cry on the right is we need more guns because if the victims were armed then they would have killed the perpetrators.
Don't gun sales tend to go up after these events? The whole thing seems to be feeding on itself, with a big help from legislatures and the courts suggesting not being able carry an AR-15 down the street is a violation of liberty or something, so it is getting more and more extreme.
No doubt pretty soon not carrying a gun in a classroom or mall or wherever will be presented as a failing of the individual concerned. Don't you want to keep yourself/your family safe? So why didn't you take a handgun to the little league game?
Comments
2. The Libdem map of net gains that @IanB2 posted
@BritainElects
·
52s
Ancoats and Beswick (Manchester) council election result:
LDEM: 49.7% (+38.7)
LAB: 38.9% (-16.9)
GRN: 8.1% (-9.6)
CON: 3.0% (-5.7)
IND: 0.3% (+0.3)
Liberal Democrat GAIN from Labour.
Doesn’t mean that Matt Walsh’s famous question “What is a woman?” Won’t turn up in a British election debate though. Sunak’s answer is “adult human female”, how will others answer that question?
BJO punchline?
Re: privy counsel
It does actually have value - it’s an official body which has confidentiality obligations attached. So it is commonly used to brief the LOTO and other senior opposition politicians when the government needs to share privileged information.
Could you replicate this some other way - sure - but what fun would that be? Do you need the “rarely right and never honourable” honorific? Of course not, but who does it harm? Membership should probably be time-limited though rather than for life as it is at the moment… although technically most of the stuff happens through sub-committees of the privy counsel (IIRC the Cabinet is technically a sub-committee of the Privy Counsel, while the prime minister is merely the chair of said sub-committee
(The lady with the nice dress and the big sword).
Corbyn fought two elections (vigorously supported by SKS)
JC never crashed the economy and jacked up my mortgage. Liz Truss did.
Feel that in my water.
I wanted Penny or Kemi to win
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/4525103.stm
Goodwin seems to assume all right wingers really think like him but just dare not say it out loud. A bit like some lefties think the country really wants a socialist utopia if only they weren’t compromised by false consciousness.
Don’t fancy an away trip to Millwall next season.
Edit - Or to Luton, Smoggies, or Coventry.
I'll be rooting for Coventry this go. Would be great to see Robins at the club he will almost certainly be most associated with as a manager go through all 4 divisions.
The only possible way to read the LE results, even with all the caveats around them, is as a determination to punish the Tories.
The Rishi “bounce” - which is real - is not enough to compensate. His government looks increasingly irrelevant, and I think the debate will move on to what a Labour government might look like.
I think 35 is the Tory ceiling, but even if they narrow the gap to 7, ie Labour 42, I think tactical voting delivers a modest Labour majority.
Remember when one of the Brexit arguments was that the EU had “too many Presidents”?
Even to us political obsessives, the British order of precedence is a dark, wondrous and bloody confusing thing…
Highest Lib Dem % since 2019 GE.
Lowest Labour % since 14 Aug (when Johnson was PM).
Westminster VI (7 May):
Labour 41% (-4)
Conservative 29% (+1)
Liberal Democrat 16% (+4)
Reform UK 5% (-2)
Green 4% (–)
SNP 3% (+1)
Other 1% (–)
Changes +/- 30 April
But if that's not what's occurring here, and 20% really is a fair assessment of the probability of a Labour majority, then laying it @ the current 1.9 represents absolutely stonking value!
Seems a plausible result to me.
Labour leader Keir Starmer’s net approval rating stands at +10%, the same as last week. 38% approve of Starmer’s job performance (-1), while 28% disapprove (-1).
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak receives a net approval rating of -7%, down two points from our poll last Sunday. Yesterday’s poll finds 33% approving of his overall job performance (-2) against 40% (–) disapproving.
48% expect a Labour victory in the next election, whereas 31% expect a Conservative victory in total.
Anyway my son’s bro-in-law is a Millwall supporter. Nice chap, professional carer.
Share of X party's 2019 voters backing the LDs:
Labour voters: 5% (+2 on last week)
Cons voters: 7% (+5)
Approvals:
Starmer: +10 (-)
Sunak: -7 (-2)
Best PM:
Starmer: 41% (-)
Sunak: 35% (-2)
https://twitter.com/Beyond_Topline/status/1655605276953788416
The Tories are in deep trouble.
I suspect Electoral Calculus has outlasted its usefulness. We need another MRP.
I'd rather live in a country where police shoot two dogs, and taser its owner:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-65523821
Than one where someone walks into a shopping centre and kills eight people, and some inhabitants still mindlessly screech: "RIGHTS!!!!":
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65521656
There really is a balance to this stuff. But I'd rather have the former than the latter.
Anyway - at the moment I know who are feeling better about their chances!
It is not my expectation - but it is a possibility.
LAB: 355 (+153)
CON: 177 (-188)
LDM: 61 (+50)
SNP: 32 (-16)
PLC: 5 (+1)
GRN: 1 (=)
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1655606237248012289
At the top end of my expectation. But again it is the Tories that suffer here, not Labour.
Ed Davey has understood after a decade, which voters to target. It also helps that Lib Dem voters quite like Keir Starmer and the Tories keep going on about penises whilst destroying the economy.
We have an office, in Dallas, pretty close to that shopping centre, which I visited a few weeks ago.
This is not some backward, far right hicksville, this is a prosperous outer suburb. Hard to think of a London analogy but let’s go with Rayne’s Park or something.
We have folks who have relocated from other places to work in this office, and I wonder how they and their families are feeling.
We’ve just sent out a group email to that team. I’ll find out more when I check in with the office lead this afternoon.
But election after, he will get a big majority, if the Tories self-implode which seems likely.
The LDs will be very lucky if they get to 35, just given the insane vote tallies they need to overcome in their target seats. The LD voter’s real contribution will be to tip the balance in Labour / Tory marginals.
LD support in the under 30s is a fraction of what it was a generation ago.
The sort of mirror reflection of the people who think we could cut tax in half, if we just fired half the civil service.
This is very similar to 2017 where May had a lot of swings in the Red Wall but just not quite enough to get across the line.
I cannot see how that situation will have got anything but better for the Lib Dems now.
We really could see a result much worse than 2019 and 1997 for the Tories.
I note that the cops are looking at the culprits ideology. Might they not consider looking too at other ideologies, starting with the National Rifle Association?
This time, it's blooming obvious that the way to avoid the CoC is to give Starmer more seats.
Because hardly anyone thinks the Conservatives are coming back from this to win.
The cry on the right is we need more guns because if the victims were armed then they would have killed the perpetrators.
I struggle to make any sense, for example, of the polling that shows Biden losing to Trump and DeSantis.
I would like to just shrug and say, Americans are crazy, but it’s obviously more complicated than that.
Having said that, I finally finished “Before the Storm” by Rick Perlstein, which is an exceptional account of the ill-fated Goldwater Presidential run. It’s obvious there is has been a thick seam in quite bizarre political opinion in the USA since…forever.
No doubt pretty soon not carrying a gun in a classroom or mall or wherever will be presented as a failing of the individual concerned. Don't you want to keep yourself/your family safe? So why didn't you take a handgun to the little league game?