Howdy, Stranger!

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

I hope Nadine Dorries is right – politicalbetting.com

123457

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,171

    From the details on the front page:
    Lab 47% (+2)
    Con 20% (-2)
    Reform 12% (+2)

    https://news.sky.com/story/tuesdays-national-newspaper-front-pages-12427754

    (The link says Tuesday, but it works for Thursday!)
    Broken, sleazy Tories now fallen off the end of the slide?
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,749
    It doesn't seem to have occurred to Sunak and the Tories that the 20% of voters who think that Stopping the Boats is the number one priority for the country are precisely the same 20% who are going to vote Tory anyway. (Unless some of them slide off to Reform if the Boats aren't Stopped.)
  • Scott_xP said:

    @KevinASchofield

    Rishi Sunak’s good night didn’t last long. The Times is reporting a new YouGov puts the Tories on 20% - 27 points behind Labour.

    Must be a rogue poll. The fan club repeatedly assured us Starmer would take a big hit for his role in the Post Office scandal. It was all over GBeebies and Guido, it must cut through surely.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,549
    edited January 2024

    Probably just an outlier :lol:
    If their MRP says a Labour majority of 120 on a 13.5 point lead, a swing of 12.7% identical to that which the BBC says delivered a bare majority on UNC, then what kind of majority do YouGov think a 27 point lead will deliver.

    The regionaity of the swings does seem to mean Labour will outperform UNC, lower in Wales and London where target seats are relatively few and often fairly marginal anyway, lower in Scotland where Con-Lab swing isn't the relevant measure, and higher where all those juicy big swing targets are.

    60 seats worth of UNC outperformance is a pretty spectacular MRP claim though.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,246
    Cyclefree said:

    Where is that? If you don't mind saying.
    Google says Ventnor !
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    edited January 2024
    The Daily Star wins the headline again.
    However much they pay them isn't enough.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,172
    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1747751843453604071?s=20

    "Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    RFM: 12% (+4)
    LDM: 8% (+1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , tbc.
    Changes w/ 10-11 Jan."
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    @Steven_Swinford
    EXCLUSIVE:

    The Tories have fallen to their lowest level of support since Liz Truss was prime minister, Yougov poll for Times finds

    Support for Tories has fallen to 20%, a level not seen since October 2022 just before Truss was forced from office

    Labour has a 27 point lead

    Just 35% of 2019 Tory voters trust Sunak on migration, compared to 54% who trust Nigel Farage

    Labour: 47% (+2)
    Conservatives: 20% (-2)
    Lib Dems: 8% (-1)
    Reform: 12% (+4)
    Green: 7% (-1)
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975

    Must be a rogue poll. The fan club repeatedly assured us Starmer would take a big hit for his role in the Post Office scandal. It was all over GBeebies and Guido, it must cut through surely.
    I did. Maybe next week.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022
    The trouble is that the Labour government will be facing all this from day one knowing that the traditional centre-left parties are dying all over Europe. Can they buck the trend? I presume they are hoping that under our system the Tories will be even more unpopular and they can just largely ignore the migration issue because there is no real political competition.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,013

    Possibly but I think even Starmer expects 2 more fiscal events before the election
    1 - If a GE 2nd May, Dissolution would be 26th March, 68 days away. 6th March is budget day, 48 days away. 13 working week days in parliament between 6th March and 26th. Should we count Fridays? 🤔

    2 - There’s already some substantial elections taking place May 2nd, so party political electioneering mode will ramp up at some point anyway. With Khan and London involved that is an awful lot we will hear about “the anger expressed at Uxbridge”.

    Tory client press, and some others, already banged on about beer and curries all through one local election campaign, I suspect if Starmer remains focus of the Tory re-election attacks, what left of the press will be banging on about Sunak betting against UK on the markets and using covid to make money on vaccines. 🫣

    If the General Election isn’t 2nd of May, how much never ending politics and bun fighting can the electorate take, before they start blaming the government for it going on and on?

    3 -
    Reasons for May 2nd
    Inflation battle won still fresh in minds
    The budget - Tax cuts promise and upbeat “right track - turning corner” fresh in voters minds
    Dirty Tricks Unit clearly now on steroids and hard at work. How many red bulls can a human consume in 11 months and still be human?
    May 2nd, coinciding with local and Mayor elections, allows to be have added focus Uxbridge style election focus, the war on motorists and on how Labours £28B Green Contract will screw over UK economy and every taxpayer.
    Avoids this years expected surge in illegal channel crossings, that would be failure impossible to explain
    Avoids the damning interim covid report publication
    Avoids having to get the Rwanda Plan delivering results.
    Avoids angry PO victims asking for action on the promises Rishi made to them in January
    Avoids credibility and moral shattering set of locals before General Election
    Avoids mortgage crisis of key voters actually deepening by switching to higher mortgage deals
    Avoids the predicted doom and gloom of Q3 economic slowdown
    Avoids another “zombie conference” before election, last years seems to have properly screwed Tory polling
    Avoids two year anniversary of Trussterfuck in the news
    Avoids two year anniversary of PM Sunak in the news, and much reflection how things haven’t got better
    Avoids opposition fun with “squatting” “frit” narrative and perpetual phoney campaigning, that some believe torpedoed Majors chance of much better result

    In favour of June or later
    Micawberism - something might turn up to shift the polls, despite all the expert predictions of a conveyer belt of ever increasing difficult news for government coming in second half of year
    Use the spring board of conference to fly straight into the election. 🫣
    presumes voters still open minded who to vote for, and actually interested in hearing substance from Labour before deciding
    Anything else?

    2nd May. Anyone not yet convinced?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,719

    Sometimes I think it's amazing the human species has managed to survive given how much women are made to suffer for having children.
    Indeed. The human advantages of big brain and bipedalism come at a cost of very tricky and painful birth - resulting in a lot of lost children and mothers, relative to other mammals - and children born at a much earlier stage of development relative to other primates, again resulting in high infant mortality and a lot of hard work for mothers.
    And pregnancy for humans seems rather harder than for other mammals. I don't know why.

    As a race, we're doing ok now, but there must have been times back in the first half of human history when brain and bipedalism looked like a bigger cost than a benefit, given all that.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    Scott_xP said:

    @Steven_Swinford
    EXCLUSIVE:

    The Tories have fallen to their lowest level of support since Liz Truss was prime minister, Yougov poll for Times finds

    Support for Tories has fallen to 20%, a level not seen since October 2022 just before Truss was forced from office

    Labour has a 27 point lead

    Just 35% of 2019 Tory voters trust Sunak on migration, compared to 54% who trust Nigel Farage

    Labour: 47% (+2)
    Conservatives: 20% (-2)
    Lib Dems: 8% (-1)
    Reform: 12% (+4)
    Green: 7% (-1)

    It's January. We're depressed, cold and skint.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,998
    Can anyone explain to me how this would not be legislating from the bench, and a huge political power grab by the Court ?

    The Supreme Court Is About to Seize Way More Power From Democratic Presidents

    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/01/supreme-court-democrats-president-chevron-precedent.html
    … The three liberal justices, led by Kagan, mounted an impressive defense of Chevron in the face of their colleagues’ open hostility. At its core, Kagan explained, the doctrine is about respecting democratic choices. Congress (whom the people elect) passes laws that grant the president (whom the people elect) broad discretion to make certain policy choices by assigning key decisions to executive agencies; federal judges (whom the people do not elect) must defer to these decisions so long as the accountable officials interpret the law reasonably. Some choices are highly technical and rely on the agency’s specialized expertise. Others are contentious, allowing the agency to take sides in a public debate.

    With Chevron, each new administration provides its own answer to these questions. If the people don’t like the answers, as Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted, they can vote for a new president. Without Chevron, each administration is handcuffed to the federal judiciary’s answer, replacing a “democratic structure” with “judicial policymaking.” Jackson didn’t say this next part, but everyone knows it: Because SCOTUS is relentlessly hostile to the administrative state, this system stacks the deck in favor of deregulation. Which—let’s be honest—means boosting Republican presidents and hobbling Democratic ones.

    And yet, throughout Wednesday’s arguments, the conservative justices condemned Chevron as some kind of anti-accountability chaos agent that sabotages good government. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissed Chevron during his audition for SCOTUS, assailed the decision’s democratic traits as a bug, not a feature. “The reality of how this works,” Kavanaugh said, “is Chevron itself ushers in shocks to the system every four or eight years when a new administration comes in—whether it’s communications law or securities law, competition law or environmental law, it goes from pillar to post.” New administrations change policy, Kavanaugh continued, “because they have disagreements with the policy of the prior administration.”

    But why is that a bad thing? Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who did a stellar (if futile) job defending Chevron, reminded Kavanaugh: “There’s nothing inherently problematic or incompatible with our system of government to recognize that agencies can carry out” new policies where Congress gave them flexibility. Gorsuch, archenemy of the administrative state, sounded aghast at this arrangement...
  • 1 - If a GE 2nd May, Dissolution would be 26th March, 68 days away. 6th March is budget day, 48 days away. 13 working week days in parliament between 6th March and 26th. Should we count Fridays? 🤔

    2 - There’s already some substantial elections taking place May 2nd, so party political electioneering mode will ramp up at some point anyway. With Khan and London involved that is an awful lot we will hear about “the anger expressed at Uxbridge”.

    Tory client press, and some others, already banged on about beer and curries all through one local election campaign, I suspect if Starmer remains focus of the Tory re-election attacks, what left of the press will be banging on about Sunak betting against UK on the markets and using covid to make money on vaccines. 🫣

    If the General Election isn’t 2nd of May, how much never ending politics and bun fighting can the electorate take, before they start blaming the government for it going on and on?

    3 -
    Reasons for May 2nd
    Inflation battle won still fresh in minds
    The budget - Tax cuts promise and upbeat “right track - turning corner” fresh in voters minds
    Dirty Tricks Unit clearly now on steroids and hard at work. How many red bulls can a human consume in 11 months and still be human?
    May 2nd, coinciding with local and Mayor elections, allows to be have added focus Uxbridge style election focus, the war on motorists and on how Labours £28B Green Contract will screw over UK economy and every taxpayer.
    Avoids this years expected surge in illegal channel crossings, that would be failure impossible to explain
    Avoids the damning interim covid report publication
    Avoids having to get the Rwanda Plan delivering results.
    Avoids angry PO victims asking for action on the promises Rishi made to them in January
    Avoids credibility and moral shattering set of locals before General Election
    Avoids mortgage crisis of key voters actually deepening by switching to higher mortgage deals
    Avoids the predicted doom and gloom of Q3 economic slowdown
    Avoids another “zombie conference” before election, last years seems to have properly screwed Tory polling
    Avoids two year anniversary of Trussterfuck in the news
    Avoids two year anniversary of PM Sunak in the news, and much reflection how things haven’t got better
    Avoids opposition fun with “squatting” “frit” narrative and perpetual phoney campaigning, that some believe torpedoed Majors chance of much better result

    In favour of June or later
    Micawberism - something might turn up to shift the polls, despite all the expert predictions of a conveyer belt of ever increasing difficult news for government coming in second half of year
    Use the spring board of conference to fly straight into the election. 🫣
    presumes voters still open minded who to vote for, and actually interested in hearing substance from Labour before deciding
    Anything else?

    2nd May. Anyone not yet convinced?
    Not me at all - sorry
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022
    Nigelb said:

    Can anyone explain to me how this would not be legislating from the bench, and a huge political power grab by the Court ?

    The Supreme Court Is About to Seize Way More Power From Democratic Presidents

    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/01/supreme-court-democrats-president-chevron-precedent.html
    … The three liberal justices, led by Kagan, mounted an impressive defense of Chevron in the face of their colleagues’ open hostility. At its core, Kagan explained, the doctrine is about respecting democratic choices. Congress (whom the people elect) passes laws that grant the president (whom the people elect) broad discretion to make certain policy choices by assigning key decisions to executive agencies; federal judges (whom the people do not elect) must defer to these decisions so long as the accountable officials interpret the law reasonably. Some choices are highly technical and rely on the agency’s specialized expertise. Others are contentious, allowing the agency to take sides in a public debate.

    With Chevron, each new administration provides its own answer to these questions. If the people don’t like the answers, as Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted, they can vote for a new president. Without Chevron, each administration is handcuffed to the federal judiciary’s answer, replacing a “democratic structure” with “judicial policymaking.” Jackson didn’t say this next part, but everyone knows it: Because SCOTUS is relentlessly hostile to the administrative state, this system stacks the deck in favor of deregulation. Which—let’s be honest—means boosting Republican presidents and hobbling Democratic ones.

    And yet, throughout Wednesday’s arguments, the conservative justices condemned Chevron as some kind of anti-accountability chaos agent that sabotages good government. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who dissed Chevron during his audition for SCOTUS, assailed the decision’s democratic traits as a bug, not a feature. “The reality of how this works,” Kavanaugh said, “is Chevron itself ushers in shocks to the system every four or eight years when a new administration comes in—whether it’s communications law or securities law, competition law or environmental law, it goes from pillar to post.” New administrations change policy, Kavanaugh continued, “because they have disagreements with the policy of the prior administration.”

    But why is that a bad thing? Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who did a stellar (if futile) job defending Chevron, reminded Kavanaugh: “There’s nothing inherently problematic or incompatible with our system of government to recognize that agencies can carry out” new policies where Congress gave them flexibility. Gorsuch, archenemy of the administrative state, sounded aghast at this arrangement...

    All those people who have cheered on the increasing power of the courts in this country ought to be careful what they wish for.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,527
    CatMan said:

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1747751843453604071?s=20

    "Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    RFM: 12% (+4)
    LDM: 8% (+1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , tbc.
    Changes w/ 10-11 Jan."

    Could Reform overtake the Tories before the election?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,886
    edited January 2024
    Cookie said:

    Indeed. The human advantages of big brain and bipedalism come at a cost of very tricky and painful birth - resulting in a lot of lost children and mothers, relative to other mammals - and children born at a much earlier stage of development relative to other primates, again resulting in high infant mortality and a lot of hard work for mothers.
    And pregnancy for humans seems rather harder than for other mammals. I don't know why.

    As a race, we're doing ok now, but there must have been times back in the first half of human history when brain and bipedalism looked like a bigger cost than a benefit, given all that.
    We come into this world in blood and screaming.
    We are extremely fortunate and blessed if we don't leave the same way.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,171

    1 - If a GE 2nd May, Dissolution would be 26th March, 68 days away. 6th March is budget day, 48 days away. 13 working week days in parliament between 6th March and 26th. Should we count Fridays? 🤔

    2 - There’s already some substantial elections taking place May 2nd, so party political electioneering mode will ramp up at some point anyway. With Khan and London involved that is an awful lot we will hear about “the anger expressed at Uxbridge”.

    Tory client press, and some others, already banged on about beer and curries all through one local election campaign, I suspect if Starmer remains focus of the Tory re-election attacks, what left of the press will be banging on about Sunak betting against UK on the markets and using covid to make money on vaccines. 🫣

    If the General Election isn’t 2nd of May, how much never ending politics and bun fighting can the electorate take, before they start blaming the government for it going on and on?

    3 -
    Reasons for May 2nd
    Inflation battle won still fresh in minds
    The budget - Tax cuts promise and upbeat “right track - turning corner” fresh in voters minds
    Dirty Tricks Unit clearly now on steroids and hard at work. How many red bulls can a human consume in 11 months and still be human?
    May 2nd, coinciding with local and Mayor elections, allows to be have added focus Uxbridge style election focus, the war on motorists and on how Labours £28B Green Contract will screw over UK economy and every taxpayer.
    Avoids this years expected surge in illegal channel crossings, that would be failure impossible to explain
    Avoids the damning interim covid report publication
    Avoids having to get the Rwanda Plan delivering results.
    Avoids angry PO victims asking for action on the promises Rishi made to them in January
    Avoids credibility and moral shattering set of locals before General Election
    Avoids mortgage crisis of key voters actually deepening by switching to higher mortgage deals
    Avoids the predicted doom and gloom of Q3 economic slowdown
    Avoids another “zombie conference” before election, last years seems to have properly screwed Tory polling
    Avoids two year anniversary of Trussterfuck in the news
    Avoids two year anniversary of PM Sunak in the news, and much reflection how things haven’t got better
    Avoids opposition fun with “squatting” “frit” narrative and perpetual phoney campaigning, that some believe torpedoed Majors chance of much better result

    In favour of June or later
    Micawberism - something might turn up to shift the polls, despite all the expert predictions of a conveyer belt of ever increasing difficult news for government coming in second half of year
    Use the spring board of conference to fly straight into the election. 🫣
    presumes voters still open minded who to vote for, and actually interested in hearing substance from Labour before deciding
    Anything else?

    2nd May. Anyone not yet convinced?
    You've convinced me that any sensible government would be going for 2nd May.

    November it is then.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,594
    CatMan said:

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1747751843453604071?s=20

    "Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    RFM: 12% (+4)
    LDM: 8% (+1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , tbc.
    Changes w/ 10-11 Jan."

    12% for Reform is UKIP 2015 levels
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,983
    Early in the morning is an odd time. Perhaps to take account of the time difference as he calls a GE from his Californian mansion?
  • CatMan said:

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1747751843453604071?s=20

    "Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    RFM: 12% (+4)
    LDM: 8% (+1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , tbc.
    Changes w/ 10-11 Jan."

    Broken, sleazy Tories and Greens on the slide!
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,549
    Pro_Rata said:

    If their MRP says a Labour majority of 120 on a 13.5 point lead, a swing of 12.7% identical to that which the BBC says delivered a bare majority on UNC, then what kind of majority do YouGov think a 27 point lead will deliver.

    The regionaity of the swings does seem to mean Labour will outperform UNC, lower in Wales and London where target seats are relatively few and often fairly marginal anyway, lower in Scotland where Con-Lab swing isn't the relevant measure, and higher where all those juicy big swing targets are.

    60 seats worth of UNC outperformance is a pretty spectacular MRP claim though.
    UNS even!!!
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,571

    Could Reform overtake the Tories before the election?
    Apart from the downside - that would be hilarious.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,924

    From the details on the front page:
    Lab 47% (+2)
    Con 20% (-2)
    Reform 12% (+2)

    https://news.sky.com/story/tuesdays-national-newspaper-front-pages-12427754

    (The link says Tuesday, but it works for Thursday!)
    I see austerity Reeves says she wants to cut taxes for those earning over £100k.

    No wonder Tories are jumping ship.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,171
    CatMan said:

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1747751843453604071?s=20

    "Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    RFM: 12% (+4)
    LDM: 8% (+1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , tbc.
    Changes w/ 10-11 Jan."

    Labour majority of 410 on those figures, via Electoral Calculus; Tories down to 41 seats.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    CatMan said:

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1747751843453604071?s=20

    "Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    RFM: 12% (+4)
    LDM: 8% (+1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)

    Via
    @YouGov
    , tbc.
    Changes w/ 10-11 Jan."

    No, Reform are up only 2% compared to the 10/11 Jan poll

    https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/TheTimes_VI_240111_W.pdf
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,719
    dixiedean said:

    We come into this world in blood and screaming.
    We are extremely fortunate and blessed if we don't leave the same way.
    Yes, though given that it's the fate of many animals to leave the world in the talons and jaws of other animals, while human births are trickier than many, on deaths we probably have the better side of the bargain!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,719

    I see austerity Reeves says she wants to cut taxes for those earning over £100k.

    No wonder Tories are jumping ship.
    It's increasingly looking like Labour might be attempting to govern with sanity rather than spite.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,246
    MattW said:

    Google says Ventnor !
    Easy mistake to make. Perhaps the Alps are Photoshop.


  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,571
    Scott_xP said:

    @Steven_Swinford
    EXCLUSIVE:

    The Tories have fallen to their lowest level of support since Liz Truss was prime minister, Yougov poll for Times finds

    Support for Tories has fallen to 20%, a level not seen since October 2022 just before Truss was forced from office

    Labour has a 27 point lead

    Just 35% of 2019 Tory voters trust Sunak on migration, compared to 54% who trust Nigel Farage

    Labour: 47% (+2)
    Conservatives: 20% (-2)
    Lib Dems: 8% (-1)
    Reform: 12% (+4)
    Green: 7% (-1)

    At least Liz gave us a laugh - something to giggle about, pork markets, "growth! :-D". Rishi was supposed to be the return to Grown Up Politics but he's just been a very, very dull attempt at a christmas-cracker joke.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,172

    No, Reform are up only 2% compared to the 10/11 Jan poll

    https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/TheTimes_VI_240111_W.pdf
    Yes, and Lib Dem should be down 1 as well
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163

    Labour majority of 410 on those figures, via Electoral Calculus; Tories down to 41 seats.
    Suspect we have now reached the Lab high point.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975

    Could Reform overtake the Tories before the election?
    No
  • isamisam Posts: 41,135

    Could Reform overtake the Tories before the election?
    It goes to show how crazy these times are, that I doubt one in a thousand people in the UK could name two Reform politicians (and I’m including Farage as one even though he’s not) yet they’re 8pts behind the govt in a poll.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,527
    2024 could be a PPS (perfect populist storm):

    - Reform overtake the Tories triggering a meltdown of the party
    - A big chunk of the remaining Tory vote then switches sides and Reform approaches 30% in the polls
    - Reform start breaking through in the Red Well leaving Keir Starmer's well planned strategy in disarray
    - Election ends in a hung parliament with the Tories wiped out
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100
    Oh fuck.
  • Suspect we have now reached the Lab high point.

    Why?
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,269
    Scott_xP said:

    @Steven_Swinford
    EXCLUSIVE:

    The Tories have fallen to their lowest level of support since Liz Truss was prime minister, Yougov poll for Times finds

    Support for Tories has fallen to 20%, a level not seen since October 2022 just before Truss was forced from office

    Labour has a 27 point lead

    Just 35% of 2019 Tory voters trust Sunak on migration, compared to 54% who trust Nigel Farage

    Labour: 47% (+2)
    Conservatives: 20% (-2)
    Lib Dems: 8% (-1)
    Reform: 12% (+4)
    Green: 7% (-1)

    All this Rwanda rubbish is doing is increasing media coverage on the government's own failure on immigration.

    It's the equivalent of Lib Dem's in 2015 campaigning solely on a graduate tax to to replace tuition fees.

    Or Corbyn 2019 leading every speech on how to improve relations with Russia.

    Reminding voters of your own shortcomings as a primary part of a campaign isn't a great strategy. Unless your goal, in this case, is to give Reform an electoral boost.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100

    Could Reform overtake the Tories before the election?
    These are getting to close to Canada 1993 numbers.

    Tories would only save seats by accidental three-way marginals emerging through this.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,527

    No
    You've Rogered them now, so to speak.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,594

    2024 could be a PPS (perfect populist storm):

    - Reform overtake the Tories triggering a meltdown of the party
    - A big chunk of the remaining Tory vote then switches sides and Reform approaches 30% in the polls
    - Reform start breaking through in the Red Well leaving Keir Starmer's well planned strategy in disarray
    - Election ends in a hung parliament with the Tories wiped out

    Not going to happen and certainly not unless Farage comes back to lead Reform.

    Therefore under FPTP the Tories will start to squeeze the Reform vote at least a bit by polling day
  • MattW said:

    Easy mistake to make. Perhaps the Alps are Photoshop.


    Surely Ventnor is rocky?

    Maybe Ryde?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,135
    HYUFD said:

    12% for Reform is UKIP 2015 levels
    But UKIP had a policy, and non stop media coverage. Maybe it’s because I’m not aboard the Reform train yet, but they don’t seem to have any media coverage, or any real policies.

    It’s just people preferring Farage to Rishi I suppose
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,171

    2024 could be a PPS (perfect populist storm):

    - Reform overtake the Tories triggering a meltdown of the party
    - A big chunk of the remaining Tory vote then switches sides and Reform approaches 30% in the polls
    - Reform start breaking through in the Red Well leaving Keir Starmer's well planned strategy in disarray
    - Election ends in a hung parliament with the Tories wiped out

    - Then you wake up and it's all been a dream - Labour have the biggest landslide in history, LDs are the Official Opposition and Reform have precisely zero MPs.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,171

    Surely Ventnor is rocky?

    Maybe Ryde?
    Rocky Ryde is very apt for the Tories right now.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 26,246
    edited January 2024

    Surely Ventnor is rocky?

    Maybe Ryde?
    Ventnor !

    https://www.isleofwight.com/listing/ventnor-beach-ventnor-isle-of-wight/
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,100

    Surely Ventnor is rocky?

    Maybe Ryde?
    That's Ventnor.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,171
    Before we get too carried away we should remember that there was a Yougov last February showing a 28% Labour lead.

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/r2r7ejhs5x/TheTimes_VI_230215_W_.pdf
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022

    - Then you wake up and it's all been a dream - Labour have the biggest landslide in history, LDs are the Official Opposition and Reform have precisely zero MPs.
    That wouldn't be such a bad result for populists. It would reinforce how broken the system is and how unrepresentative of the public parliament is.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,172
    These are the correct changes

    https://x.com/BritainElects/status/1747753312529588255?s=20

    "📊 Labour lead at 27pts
    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    REF: 12% (+2)

    via
    @YouGov

    Chgs. w/ 10 Jan"

    And it's:

    LDM: 8% (-1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163

    Caroline Lucas
    @CarolineLucas
    ·
    1h
    So this vile #RwandaBill passes 320 to 276 and takes a wrecking ball to international law, showcasing a dying government degrading our democratic processes and vilifying some of the world’s most vulnerable people. Britain is better than this
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,171

    That wouldn't be such a bad result for populists. It would reinforce how broken the system is and how unrepresentative of the public parliament is.
    The LibDems have been banging that drum for ages - to no avail at all.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,604
    A Canada-style wipeout for the Tories seems much more likely than many seem to think.

    They are utterly hopeless and clueless.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780

    I see austerity Reeves says she wants to cut taxes for those earning over £100k.

    No wonder Tories are jumping ship.
    I suppose you couldn't bring yourself to write "SKS please explain [a 27% poll lead]"

    Anyway, for once Starmer/Reeves are taking a lead from your hero. In 2017 Corbyn went into the election promising that no-one earning under £80k would see an increase in their taxes. With inflation that would be over £100k now.

    I didn't believe Corbyn then, and I don't believe Starmer/Reeves now.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,998
    .
    Ratters said:

    Surely every bill the government sends up the Lord's has been backed by MPs? What point does Sunak think he's making?

    I fail to see any convention that stops the Lord's from amending the teeth out of the Act or rejecting it altogether. This hair brained scheme hadn't even been considered in the last election manifesto so I don't see that he has a leg to stand on.
    We’ve seen his attitude towards the judiciary this week.
    This is just part and parcel.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975

    2024 could be a PPS (perfect populist storm):

    - Reform overtake the Tories triggering a meltdown of the party
    - A big chunk of the remaining Tory vote then switches sides and Reform approaches 30% in the polls
    - Reform start breaking through in the Red Well leaving Keir Starmer's well planned strategy in disarray
    - Election ends in a hung parliament with the Tories wiped out

    Labour in really big trouble then William?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,594
    edited January 2024
    Cyclefree said:

    A Canada-style wipeout for the Tories seems much more likely than many seem to think.

    They are utterly hopeless and clueless.

    Not yet, the 1993 Canada result was their populist right Reform party 19%, Canadian Tories 16%, so we are not there at present.

    Of course the end result of that was to shift the main right of centre party in Canada even further right. With Reform's successor, the Canadian Alliance effectively taking over the Canadian Tories in 2003 to create today's Conservative Party of Canada
  • CatMan said:

    These are the correct changes

    https://x.com/BritainElects/status/1747753312529588255?s=20

    "📊 Labour lead at 27pts
    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    REF: 12% (+2)

    via
    @YouGov

    Chgs. w/ 10 Jan"

    And it's:

    LDM: 8% (-1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)

    Oh, Ok, then! Broken, sleazy Tories, Greens AND LibDems on the slide :lol:
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163

    Why?
    Surely even this set of tories have a floor?
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022

    The LibDems have been banging that drum for ages - to no avail at all.
    Not on that scale!
  • Surely Ventnor is rocky?

    Maybe Ryde?
    Ryde has a big pier!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,161

    2024 could be a PPS (perfect populist storm):

    - Reform overtake the Tories triggering a meltdown of the party
    - A big chunk of the remaining Tory vote then switches sides and Reform approaches 30% in the polls
    - Reform start breaking through in the Red Well leaving Keir Starmer's well planned strategy in disarray
    - Election ends in a hung parliament with the Tories wiped out

    I don't see how the current situation of Tory 26%, Reform 9% is going to switch around in just a few months.


  • Surely even this set of tories have a floor?
    Used to be 30%. Damned if I know what it is now.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,135
    edited January 2024



    Surely even this set of tories have a floor?
    This was what they were polling pre Boris, and now they’re back there. Maybe this is what they are when they’ve an leader who is unpopular with their voters, whose shoulders Farage is tapping on
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,498
    kle4 said:

    Probably. Will that stave off disaster, or simply reduce it do you think?

    It would need to have the dynamic impact of drastically reducing (all but eliminating frankly) the crossings due to the pull factors not being present. I believe it can, providing there can be lots of flights initially. I forget the actual figures, but you are several more times as likely to have your asylum claim accepted in the UK than in France. That's the pull factor. If you think you're going to be sent to Rwanda, you're not going to set foot on that dinghy.

    If that happened (and it's an almighty if), it doesn't just help the Tories on an important issue, it writes their whole election campaign as the party willing to act, take the brickbats, and offer solutions not platitudes.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5,555
    edited January 2024

    These are getting to close to Canada 1993 numbers.

    Tories would only save seats by accidental three-way marginals emerging through this.
    This would require large numbers of rural seats to go Lib Dem, no?

    Clearly possible, given historical Lib Dem strength in the south west, but doesn't seem likely under Davey.

    (Reform percentage is bullshit: willing to take sensible bets at evens on a chosen percentage of votes nationwide)

    Why Labour have never made serious attempts to woo rural constituencies a mystery to me. Seems as easy or easier than tories trying to court inner city votes.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,161
    "Carol Vorderman
    @carolvorders

    Shocker poll for Tories in @thetimes tomorrow with @YouGov

    LABOUR LEADS BY 27%

    Labour: 47% (+2)
    Conservatives: 20% (-2)
    Lib Dems: 8% (-1)
    Reform: 12% (+4)
    Green: 7% (-1)

    GENERAL ELECTION NOW "

    https://twitter.com/carolvorders/status/1747761501790671251
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,549

    Labour majority of 410 on those figures, via Electoral Calculus; Tories down to 41 seats.
    Interesting to look at a post near extinction Tory leadership election.

    On EC those still standing i would nclude Barclay, Laura Trott, Zahawi, Gavin Williamson, Tugendhat and Jayawardena. And Mark Francois. And perhaps someone in on one of the 2+3 new seats that survive
  • That's Ventnor.
    Don't disbelieve you. It's a while since I was there, and the weather was a bit wild.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,337
    edited January 2024



    Surely even this set of tories have a floor?
    I think the problem is they have a floor of people who will consider themselves Tories in a general sense, but it is looking as though the floor for those will actually always turn out to vote Tory is quite a bit lower than the party thought it was. Closer to that 20 than the 30.

    They have to genuinely consider that they could do worse than 1997 (and once that happens they risk an absoltely apocalyptic tipping point where you drop dozens more with small % drops), and might now take such a result if offered. I don't think in the end it will be quite that low, but in terms of seats I think a total reversal of 2019 is now most likely.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,135
    Forget the substance of what she says, the way Stella Creasy asks “What does she think NATO is” encapsulates everything I dislike about the modern left.

    https://x.com/archrose90/status/1747698848078659652?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • isamisam Posts: 41,135
    Andy_JS said:

    "Carol Vorderman
    @carolvorders

    Shocker poll for Tories in @thetimes tomorrow with @YouGov

    LABOUR LEADS BY 27%

    Labour: 47% (+2)
    Conservatives: 20% (-2)
    Lib Dems: 8% (-1)
    Reform: 12% (+4)
    Green: 7% (-1)

    GENERAL ELECTION NOW "

    https://twitter.com/carolvorders/status/1747761501790671251

    Wouldn’t be the time I’d call a GE if I were Sunak
  • Oh fuck.

    Hey, Casino, don't worry! Me and my squad of ultimate Starmer fans will protect you! Check it out! Independently targeting particle beam phalanx! WVAP! Fry half a Parliamentary constituency with this puppy! We got tactical smart missiles, phased plasma pulse rifles, RPGs, we got sonic electronic ball breakers! We got nukes, we got knives, sharp sticks, leaflets,extremely dodgy bar charts...
  • Ryde has a big pier!
    Mabe it dis a piered?




    Bed time!

  • Shouldn’t laugh.

    But I did.



  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,013
    edited January 2024
    CatMan said:

    These are the correct changes

    https://x.com/BritainElects/status/1747753312529588255?s=20

    "📊 Labour lead at 27pts
    Westminster voting intention:

    LAB: 47% (+2)
    CON: 20% (-2)
    REF: 12% (+2)

    via
    @YouGov

    Chgs. w/ 10 Jan"

    And it's:

    LDM: 8% (-1)
    GRN: 7% (-1)

    It’s basically a completely uninteresting no change poll. Just how you rearrange your deck chairs on deck.

    What trend there is, virtually nothing, but LLG weakening in election year, C&R getting stronger.

    This one LLG 62 C&R 32
    10th LLG 62. C&R 32
    2nd LLG 63. C&R 31

    These are the knowns, I’m not letting you dispute what I’m saying so far, as this is Empirical fact.

    Now the unknowns. How fluid LLG anti Tory votes and C&R anti Labour votes are on election day.

    In fact I suspect some PBers who fancy themselves as psephologists will argue you can’t add all R to C, R tell pollsters when push come to shove at least a third will go Labour if not R.

    Unfortunately though this isn’t what happened last election - after starting gun was fired Tories swallowed virtually the lot. So you don’t really know how fluid R to C actually is when push comes to shove, just a lot of speculative buts: but Starmer isn’t Corbyn, but Rishi not Boris, no Brexit to get done etc - against the fact they swallowed the lot late on last time.

    You are so lucky to have me, I am so good at this now, all the counting sheep I’ve been doing has me right on my psephological game. 😌
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,163
    kle4 said:

    I think the problem is they have a floor of people who will consider themselves Tories in a general sense, but it is looking as though the floor for those will actually always turn out to vote Tory is quite a bit lower than the party thought it was. Closer to that 20 than the 30.

    They have to genuinely consider that they could do worse than 1997 (and once that happens they risk an absoltely apocalyptic tipping point where you drop dozens more with small % drops), and might now take such a result if offered. I don't think in the end it will be quite that low, but in terms of seats I think a total reversal of 2019 is now most likely.
    I'm sticking to the view that as ever in UK elections there will be a tightening closer to polling day.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    carnforth said:

    This would require large numbers of rural seats to go Lib Dem, no?

    Clearly possible, given historical Lib Dem strength in the south west, but doesn't seem likely under Davey.

    (Reform percentage is bullshit: willing to take sensible bets at evens on a chosen percentage of votes nationwide)

    Why Labour have never made serious attempts to woo rural constituencies a mystery to me. Seems as easy or easier than tories trying to court inner city votes.
    I think Labour have woken up to the rural potential now, following by-election victories in largely rural Selby and Mid-Beds. Even in Tamworth the campaign literature referred to "Tamworth and the Villages".

  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,549
    As a couple of last points before disappearing:

    Wikipedia running a Candidates in the Next United Kingdom General Election page (apols, my share/paste crashing atm)

    Second, I make it the Q1 minimum Lab poll lead as 14% at the moment, unless the MRP counts?

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,527

    Labour in really big trouble then William?
    Yes, worrying times for them. If the Tories keep falling they'll really be in trouble. :)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,998

    All those people who have cheered on the increasing power of the courts in this country ought to be careful what they wish for.
    Are court powers increasing, or is government just finding their insistence on laws as they exist increasingly irksome ?

    A government with coherent plans, and parliamentary support to legislate for them, would not be having quite the same problems.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,013

    Not me at all - sorry
    No worries Big G.

    My argument is, right now is peak delivery on Rishi’s promises. There will be nothing more to harvest from them that helps re-election. Quite the opposite, some key ones look set to go tits up.

    in the minds of Team Sunak this election cannot be fought on actual delivery anymore, like fiscal events and tax cuts, or Rwanda flights, or NHS better - but on promise. Promise of better, specifically the threat of Labour to that promise, because Starmer and his team you can’t trust.

    The summer boat crossings and growth downturn alone destroys even those foundation stones of promise based campaign. They will no longer have enough substance to mount any type of campaign - delivery or promise - if they go beyond May 2nd. I don’t think many on PB have quite realised this yet.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 14,013
    Pro_Rata said:

    As a couple of last points before disappearing:

    Wikipedia running a Candidates in the Next United Kingdom General Election page (apols, my share/paste crashing atm)

    Second, I make it the Q1 minimum Lab poll lead as 14% at the moment, unless the MRP counts?

    i suggest MRP doesn’t count due to different way of doing it and extrapolating the party voting data, compared to the other polls around it, I’m not convinced it should sit where it is in the wiki page and graph.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,022
    Nigelb said:

    Are court powers increasing, or is government just finding their insistence on laws as they exist increasingly irksome ?

    A government with coherent plans, and parliamentary support to legislate for them, would not be having quite the same problems.
    The issues were very clearly set out by Lord Sumption in his Reith lectures. I think he was broadly right.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,229
    edited January 2024
    Nigelb asked: "Can anyone explain to me how this would not be legislating from the bench, and a huge political power grab by the Court?"

    Sure.

    Oh, did you actually want an answer? Here's one from George Will:
    "The principle of Chevron deference, first propounded by the court in 1984, is that where legislative language is ambiguous or silent, a court reviewing an agency’s action should defer to the agency if its action is “reasonable.” This expressed progressivism’s core conviction that animates the sprawling administrative state: Modern America’s complexities require minute management by experts, who require — whose expertise justifies — vast discretion barely circumscribed by Congress."
    source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/01/12/chevron-deference-supreme-court-case/

    In short, as the legislative branch, Congress must make the laws, and not defer hard decisions on their meaning to unelected bureaucracies. So, if the Supreme Court over rules "Chevron", they would not be grabbing power for themselves, but moving legislative power from bureaucracies back to the elected representatives, where it belongs.

    (You can probably find more from other writers, but that column should get you started.)
  • isamisam Posts: 41,135
    Embarrassing. Embarrassing. Embarrassing

    Therese Coffey says that she is "shocked" the Shadow Home Secretary "can't even get the country right," because Yvette Cooper made reference to Kigali. Kigali is, of course, the capital of Rwanda

    https://x.com/bethanymrd/status/1747724106047348882?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • isamisam Posts: 41,135
    isam said:

    Embarrassing. Embarrassing. Embarrassing

    Therese Coffey says that she is "shocked" the Shadow Home Secretary "can't even get the country right," because Yvette Cooper made reference to Kigali. Kigali is, of course, the capital of Rwanda

    https://x.com/bethanymrd/status/1747724106047348882?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    Couldn’t quite believe this but here it is, in all its excruciating glory.

    https://x.com/inglesongrey/status/1747740979233231251?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,998
    .

    Nigelb asked: "Can anyone explain to me how this would not be legislating from the bench, and a huge political power grab by the Court?"

    Sure.

    Oh, did you actually want an answer? Here's one from George Will:
    "The principle of Chevron deference, first propounded by the court in 1984, is that where legislative language is ambiguous or silent, a court reviewing an agency’s action should defer to the agency if its action is “reasonable.” This expressed progressivism’s core conviction that animates the sprawling administrative state: Modern America’s complexities require minute management by experts, who require — whose expertise justifies — vast discretion barely circumscribed by Congress."
    source$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/01/12/chevron-deference-supreme-court-case/

    In short, as the legislative branch, Congress must make the laws, and not defer hard decisions on their meaning to unelected bureaucracies. So, if the Supreme Court over rules "Chevron", they would not be grabbing power for themselves, but moving legislative power from bureaucracies back to the elected representatives, where it belongs.

    (You can probably find more from other writers, but that column should get you started.)

    That's rubbish, but thanks for the effort.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,795

    Must be a rogue poll. The fan club repeatedly assured us Starmer would take a big hit for his role in the Post Office scandal. It was all over GBeebies and Guido, it must cut through surely.
    In fairness the fan club was a group of one - the monotonous @Mexicanpete . I don’t recall many of the traditional PB Tories claiming much would happen to the polling
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975
    ...

    In fairness the fan club was a group of one - the monotonous @Mexicanpete . I don’t recall many of the traditional PB Tories claiming much would happen to the polling
    👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,795
    ….
  • DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,127
    Pro_Rata said:

    Interesting to look at a post near extinction Tory leadership election.

    On EC those still standing i would nclude Barclay, Laura Trott, Zahawi, Gavin Williamson, Tugendhat and Jayawardena. And Mark Francois. And perhaps someone in on one of the 2+3 new seats that survive
    Williamson would be out if Tories were down to 41 seats, because Bill Cash is retiring, Williamson's going over to Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge which would be a Labour gain. Dudley South's Mike Wood is standing in Kingswinford and South Staffordshire which would survive, Dudley North's Marco Lunghi is standing in Dudley and would lose on these numbers.

    Sir Christopher Chope for leader?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,161
    "The man supposed to stop Donald Trump is an unpopular 81-year-old
    In failing to look past Joe Biden, Democrats have shown cowardice and complacency"

    https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/04/the-man-supposed-to-stop-donald-trump-is-an-unpopular-81-year-old
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,463
    Andy_JS said:

    "The man supposed to stop Donald Trump is an unpopular 81-year-old
    In failing to look past Joe Biden, Democrats have shown cowardice and complacency"

    https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/04/the-man-supposed-to-stop-donald-trump-is-an-unpopular-81-year-old

    Cowardice and complacency is in abundant supply throughout the free world, sadly. It isn't arming itself or Ukraine nearly enough; many European countries seem to have given up on economic growth and nobody seems to care that the average person can't afford the average house any more.

    But yes the Democrats do seem to be making the similar mistakes now to those that they make in 2016. And the free world as a whole is worrying similar in its attitude to the 1930s (though at least housing was more affordable then). And that worked out great, obviously.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,527
    edited January 2024
    Reports of Pakistan hitting targets inside Iran.

    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1747808666739171359
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    Andy_JS said:

    "Carol Vorderman
    @carolvorders

    Shocker poll for Tories in @thetimes tomorrow with @YouGov

    LABOUR LEADS BY 27%

    Labour: 47% (+2)
    Conservatives: 20% (-2)
    Lib Dems: 8% (-1)
    Reform: 12% (+4)
    Green: 7% (-1)

    GENERAL ELECTION NOW "

    https://twitter.com/carolvorders/status/1747761501790671251

    She used to be intelligent, now she gets shocked by margin of error moves in polling numbers.

    Reform on 12% could be interesting though, if they actually stand in every seat and manage to get anywhere close to that number at the election.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,127
    maxh said:

    Wait...what?!

    Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but you seem to be saying that because one group of judges made errors in the PO scandal, this means JJ and/or SNP is in a better position to decide on Mitchell's libel trial than AN other judge.

    That's...bonkers.
    I'm not saying I'm 'in a better position'. I'm saying, in my belief, the judge got it wrong, for the reasons I and others have stated. Any evidence from the police was tainted, as there had obviously been a conspiracy of lying - up to ten people inside and outside the police - to get Michell.

    I'm alarmed by the way, in the middle of the PO inquiry, people seem to be very keen to argue that judges cannot get it wrong. For, it should be noted, political reasons.

    If the police did this to Mitchell, they could do it to you. Or me.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,716
    Andy_JS said:

    "The man supposed to stop Donald Trump is an unpopular 81-year-old
    In failing to look past Joe Biden, Democrats have shown cowardice and complacency"

    https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/01/04/the-man-supposed-to-stop-donald-trump-is-an-unpopular-81-year-old

    Who are "the democrats"? The incumbent president decides whether to run, and if he decides not to he has no idea whether the primary voters will pick someone electable instead. If any individual runs against the incumbent or supports someone who does, they risk losing but damaging the incumbent in the process.

    If pb got to pick the candidate we'd probably get someone more electable than whoever the Dems end up running, but this is true of nearly every election.
This discussion has been closed.