.....More bad news for Rishi. I understand Labour are using the ultra imaginitive ad agency 'Lucky Generals' to handle their campaign. Unless they are tethered by a wary SKS brace yourselves for some very funny hard hitting ads.
WHICH PARKWAY? THERE ARE SEVERAL. A PARKWAY STATION IS A STATION CONSTRUCTED OUT OF THE WAY SO CARS CAN DRIVE TO IT FROM TOWN INSTEAD OF DRIVING INTO TOWN AND HENCE AVOIDING CONGESTION.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I CAN THINK OF SEVERAL. BRISTOL PARKWAY? HORWICH PARKWAY? ALFRETON AND MANSFIELD PARKWAY? [Not sure that one still exists.]. WHICH PARKWAY? AND WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE OF THE LINK?
It's a forthcoming Disney documentary about Camden Town, Which is the location of THE ONLY PARKWAY WORTH TALKING ABOUT
Except maybe Bodmin Parkway, as it is so weird and remote
I'd forgotten about Bodmin. I picked an in-law up from there once. I forget now which one. In fact,, come to think of it, I have been to parkways Bodmin, Horwich, Luton Airport AND and Bristol. FOUR PARKWAYS. Can any pb-er beat that?
Rugby, Warwick, Worcestershire ... not that I have been to them, but those need to be added to the list.
Good, good, keep em coming...
'Worcestershire Parkway' is vague. Suggests near but not in Worcestershire.
Five! I've been to five! I can't believe I forgot Liverpool South Parkway.
Just found this handy list on Wikipedia. Though I only count stations which actually call themselves '...parkway'.
I'm already shitting myself about the 10pm SJC exit poll.
Anyone else feel the same?
Not this time. Glumly resigned.
I was fucking terrified last time though. The only news medium I could bring myself to watch was the £:$ exchange rates. If it failed to plummet, we were in the clear.
I don't think I have ever felt so relieved in my life as when Labour failed to win the 2019 GE.
They'll clearly win the 2024 one. And it will be shit. But nothing like as shit as them winning in 2019 would have been. And the obviously entirely hypothetical situation of a Conservative win would be not much to cheer.
It’s still horrible to see a spread market come up saying 150 seats though?
That’s losing 200 MPs! And 1906 was reduced to 156, so on the cusp as that record.
I reckon well under that. Skybet has 100-150 as favourite, with 50-100 and 150-200 joint secind favourite.
Spread in header says 150-158 is all we get? My maths ain’t great but that’s well over 150 losses? 🥺 100 to 150 losses would only go down to 190 at worse? I’d take that. The polling coming out is horrendous.
No, I'm talking remaining MPs rather than losses!
Yes. We are both talking different things - different markets or ways to bet - but the maths has still to add up? If not, one of the bets is a betting opportunity.
If it’s 158 seats won at election, as spread market currently says as best case, how many seat losses is that? Do they count your seat loss bet from last election finish, or cop on this parliament?
This is actually a political betting post. It’s actually on topic. 😇
Not so sure that I would be selling the SNP at 19 to be honest. They currently have 43 members but they also have 2 seats that they won where the MP defected to Alba who continue not to trouble the scorers. All other things being equal they would expect to win these back. That means that they would be effectively losing 26 seats. Not impossible, particularly if Swinney is daft enough to taint himself with Mathieson, but not exactly generous either.
Both Alba seats will be easy Labour gain on current polling - Kirkcaldy and East Lothian
I don't dispute that but 45 the proper starting place. And the SNP may pick up the odd Tory seat in the North East. It is just rather tell well judged to be tempting to me.
I'm already shitting myself about the 10pm SJC exit poll.
Anyone else feel the same?
Not this time. Glumly resigned.
I was fucking terrified last time though. The only news medium I could bring myself to watch was the £:$ exchange rates. If it failed to plummet, we were in the clear.
I don't think I have ever felt so relieved in my life as when Labour failed to win the 2019 GE.
They'll clearly win the 2024 one. And it will be shit. But nothing like as shit as them winning in 2019 would have been. And the obviously entirely hypothetical situation of a Conservative win would be not much to cheer.
It’s still horrible to see a spread market come up saying 150 seats though?
That’s losing 200 MPs! And 1906 was reduced to 156, so on the cusp as that record.
I reckon well under that. Skybet has 100-150 as favourite, with 50-100 and 150-200 joint secind favourite.
Spread in header says 150-158 is all we get? My maths ain’t great but that’s well over 150 losses? 🥺 100 to 150 losses would only go down to 190 at worse? I’d take that. The polling coming out is horrendous.
No, I'm talking remaining MPs rather than losses!
Yes. We are both talking different things - different markets or ways to bet - but the maths has still to add up? If not, one of the bets is a betting opportunity.
If it’s 158 seats won at election, as spread market currently says as best case, how many seat losses is that? Do they count your seat loss bet from last election finish, or cop on this parliament?
This is actually a political betting post. It’s actually on topic.
Well it did strike me that there was possibly an arb opportunity here, as the spreads midpoint was some way from the bookies' midpoint. 158 seats would be, what, 222 losses compared to 2019?
.....More bad news for Rishi. I understand Labour are using the ultra imaginitive ad agency 'Lucky Generals' to handle their campaign. Unless they are tethered by a wary SKS brace yourselves for some very funny hard hitting ads.
I'm already shitting myself about the 10pm SJC exit poll.
Anyone else feel the same?
Not this time. Glumly resigned.
I was fucking terrified last time though. The only news medium I could bring myself to watch was the £:$ exchange rates. If it failed to plummet, we were in the clear.
I don't think I have ever felt so relieved in my life as when Labour failed to win the 2019 GE.
They'll clearly win the 2024 one. And it will be shit. But nothing like as shit as them winning in 2019 would have been. And the obviously entirely hypothetical situation of a Conservative win would be not much to cheer.
It’s still horrible to see a spread market come up saying 150 seats though?
That’s losing 200 MPs! And 1906 was reduced to 156, so on the cusp as that record.
I reckon well under that. Skybet has 100-150 as favourite, with 50-100 and 150-200 joint secind favourite.
Spread in header says 150-158 is all we get? My maths ain’t great but that’s well over 150 losses? 🥺 100 to 150 losses would only go down to 190 at worse? I’d take that. The polling coming out is horrendous.
No, I'm talking remaining MPs rather than losses!
Yes. We are both talking different things - different markets or ways to bet - but the maths has still to add up? If not, one of the bets is a betting opportunity.
If it’s 158 seats won at election, as spread market currently says as best case, how many seat losses is that? Do they count your seat loss bet from last election finish, or cop on this parliament?
This is actually a political betting post. It’s actually on topic. 😇
CON starts at notional 372 on the new boundaries. So 158 - 372 would be 214 losses. Not dissimilar to 1906.
.....More bad news for Rishi. I understand Labour are using the ultra imaginitive ad agency 'Lucky Generals' to handle their campaign. Unless they are tethered by a wary SKS brace yourselves for some very funny hard hitting ads.
That's pathetic. Feeble voiceover, no narrative, minimal impact
That's like missing an open goal from 2 inches. Crap
The issue with this type of video is that it is just listing problems. There is not one single solution given.
For example, 90% of crimes are never solved. Maybe this is true but what would Labour do to fix this?
I have a better slogan for them than change: "Labour - because it's Buggins' Turn"
A fair comment. But these aren't normal times. It's a bit like football fans calling for the Manager's head. Who do you want who would be better and is willing? It's a killer question when you are mid table. When the performance has been as shambolic as this lot for 14 years, any bugger else is a sufficient answer.
.....More bad news for Rishi. I understand Labour are using the ultra imaginitive ad agency 'Lucky Generals' to handle their campaign. Unless they are tethered by a wary SKS brace yourselves for some very funny hard hitting ads.
My Party has made some policy announcements today. Green Party Policies.
• Renationalising our NHS • £70bn Wealth Tax • 500,000 Council Homes • £16 per hour min wage • Universal Basic Income • Rent Controls • Abolishing Tuition Fees • Recognition of Palestine • Free Secondary School Meals • Axe Two-Child Cap
Top Party and most people won't have a clue what they stand for.
I do confess that I misread the second point as "£70bn Welsh Tax"
Have to raise the money for all those spending pledges somehow!
Still wouldn’t be enough. Still not realistic real world manifesto grown up people outside a pressure group can vote for.
And as Ben said, regarding that pressure group, where’s the green policies and initiatives for a world facing climate emergency?
The whole point of being a political party is to explain your own policies on issues what matters to you. 2024 election Greens are going to get into a mess over being the sympathy for Gaza party rather than Green Party and probably, quite rightly, get no seats.
LibDem seats are too high. Not *wildly* too high, but too high nonetheless.
I am not a spread bettor, the downside is too much for me. I had a spread markets one once but traded out and slept better. One concern is on liquidity.
So, take the LD spread. Its very unlikely that LDs will go below 10, and 15 would be a realistic minimum, so the maximum win is 22 times the stake. On the other side a 1997 style result could lose a similar sum. A Blue Wall blowout with collapsing Tory vote and LDs having a good election could conceivably reach 100 seats. Unlikely but possible. That would be 60 times the stake. The risks are just too asymmetrical for me.
The Tories have given up. Hearing astonishing things in places like Surrey. Feels like this could be an election where the old rules get junked.
For as long as I can remember (which I admit isn't thaat long...) there has been 'informed talk' from the Lib Dems about winning a raft of seeming long-shots:
2005 - 'Anti Iraq War sentiment will win us loads of inner city labour seats' - Result - Net gain of 11 - so good, but not exactly matching the hype. (And 5 were lost to Tories/Boundary Changes) 2010 - 'Cleggasm and I agree with Nick - Lib Dems could win 100+ seats - genuine 3 party politics...' - Result - Net loss of 5 seats as all those extra votes were in all the wrong places. 2015 - 'We'll hold onto most of our seats - it's not nearly as bad as predicted' - Result - Loss of 49 seats and back into (large) taxi joke territory 2017 - 'Bollocks to Brexit - we'll take all the Remain constituencies from both parties... (epitomised by launching the campaign in Vauxhall!)' - Umm... well I suppose going from 8 to 12 seats is a 50% increase so good for the bar charts but... 2019 - 'Jo Swinson - shes the PM in waiting' - loses her own seat. Oops...
Now this could very well be the one that is different and the Libs are on to win a swathe of seats through the home counties... but I for one won't be holding my breath, and am looking at selling LD seats rather than buying them.
Yes but this election is like 1997 only with duller leaders and less optimism. LD went from 18 to 46 in that one.
In the 90's the LD's had consolidated the merger between Liberals and the SPD and had a charismatic leader in Paddy Ashdown. The 46 seats the got was a disappointment for them and they had hoped for a hung parliament. Since 2015 they have had a been stuggling to get any media presence and have had some very mediocre leaders. I would be very surprised (but delighted) if they had such a good result this time compared to 1997.
Was it a disappointment?
They started the 1997 election campaign at about 12-13% in the polls, half the level they'd achieved in 1983 and 1987, and a third less than 1992.
I bought the LibDems on the spreads (thanks OGH!) at about 23 or 24, thinking they'd end up around 30, and was very pleasantly surprised to find myself making what I considered to be a small fortune.
"A nine-year-old boy died from sepsis after doctors and nurses missed a "significant" GP note, an inquest heard.
Dylan Cope, from Newport was taken to the Grange Hospital in Cwmbran, Torfaen, on 6 December 2022 after his GP wrote “query appendicitis”, but this note was not read.
The senior doctor on shift that night said GP referrals were not being printed off and put into patients' notes because of how busy the department was.
The court also heard how Dylan’s father should have been directed to a 999 call handler, but was not due to a mistake."
The only saving grace here is that multiple independent failures were required for this awful outcome. But they happened. The whole thing is a bit more nuanced, and is worfh a read.
Every anecdote I hear from my friends who studied medicine sounds not dissimilar to the causes of this. Baffling (a) how badly the massive increase in funding is being spent and (b) the complete lack of effort to resolve the training place (post F2) jam is - for that's the main push factor among my friends, who are all at that stage.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 10m I'm usually fairly sceptical about the impact of campaigns on elections, but the difference in energy, professionalism, clarity.... never seen anything like it.
And to add that in 2010 when that record number of MPs stood down, the breakdown was 100 Labour, 35 Tory, 7 Lib Dems and 7 others.
Based on Neil's own figure of 70, the number of Tory MPs not standing again at this election is still slightly less than the 72 who stood down in 1997.
GBNews sneaked out a poll from Goodwins mob, not sure of dates Lab 47 (+1) Con 20 = Ref 12 (-2) Ld 9 = Green 8 =
34 19 lead on best PM
I believe Goodwin is the only BPC pollster one is allowed to criticise on PB. Can’t remember the details but let’s just say there are question marks over his ‘methodology’.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 10m I'm usually fairly sceptical about the impact of campaigns on elections, but the difference in energy, professionalism, clarity.... never seen anything like it.
I didn’t think much of that at all. The quick reeling off of the things not quite as good in comparison, Housing crisis, prices, feeling worse off, NHS, that bit was okay, but bit with the Tory leaders that followed didn’t work at all. The voice used as voice over didn’t work, just sounded like Channel 4 news.
Not very good overall imo
It's shit. No wonder @Scott_xP likes it. I don't like to be personal but @Scott_xP is the stupidest, dumbest, most boringly predictable commenter on PB. The weird thing is, I have a vague memory of him being vaguely interesting pre-Brexit. Quite strange, and now he's turned into Steve Bray without the interesting hats and amplifiers. ZZZZZZ
GBNews sneaked out a poll from Goodwins mob, not sure of dates Lab 47 (+1) Con 20 = Ref 12 (-2) Ld 9 = Green 8 =
34 19 lead on best PM
I believe Goodwin is the only BPC pollster one is allowed to criticise on PB. Can’t remember the details but let’s just say there are question marks over his ‘methodology’.
Well, general observations so far in post call polling All have Lab plus one Two have Con unchanged, Techne Con down 2 Ref up 2 or down 2 depending who you look at LD and Green as you were
WHICH PARKWAY? THERE ARE SEVERAL. A PARKWAY STATION IS A STATION CONSTRUCTED OUT OF THE WAY SO CARS CAN DRIVE TO IT FROM TOWN INSTEAD OF DRIVING INTO TOWN AND HENCE AVOIDING CONGESTION.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I CAN THINK OF SEVERAL. BRISTOL PARKWAY? HORWICH PARKWAY? ALFRETON AND MANSFIELD PARKWAY? [Not sure that one still exists.]. WHICH PARKWAY? AND WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE OF THE LINK?
It's a forthcoming Disney documentary about Camden Town, Which is the location of THE ONLY PARKWAY WORTH TALKING ABOUT
Except maybe Bodmin Parkway, as it is so weird and remote
I'd forgotten about Bodmin. I picked an in-law up from there once. I forget now which one. In fact,, come to think of it, I have been to parkways Bodmin, Horwich, Luton Airport AND and Bristol. FOUR PARKWAYS. Can any pb-er beat that?
Rugby, Warwick, Worcestershire ... not that I have been to them, but those need to be added to the list.
Good, good, keep em coming...
'Worcestershire Parkway' is vague. Suggests near but not in Worcestershire.
Didcot Parkway Southampton Airport Parkway Tiverton Parkway Liverpool South Parkway Oxford Parkway East Midlands Parkway Port Talbot Parkway Tame Bridge Parkway Warwick Parkway Haddenham & Thame Parkway Buckshaw Parkway Whittlesford Parkway Coleshill Parkway Sutton Parkway Stratford-upon-Avon Parkway Aylesbury Vale Parkway Ebbw Vale Parkway Thanet Parkway
I have been to Didcot, Southampton Airport, Oxford, Tame Bridge, Aylesbury Vale, Luton Airport, and Bristol.
WHICH PARKWAY? THERE ARE SEVERAL. A PARKWAY STATION IS A STATION CONSTRUCTED OUT OF THE WAY SO CARS CAN DRIVE TO IT FROM TOWN INSTEAD OF DRIVING INTO TOWN AND HENCE AVOIDING CONGESTION.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I CAN THINK OF SEVERAL. BRISTOL PARKWAY? HORWICH PARKWAY? ALFRETON AND MANSFIELD PARKWAY? [Not sure that one still exists.]. WHICH PARKWAY? AND WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE OF THE LINK?
It's a forthcoming Disney documentary about Camden Town, Which is the location of THE ONLY PARKWAY WORTH TALKING ABOUT
Except maybe Bodmin Parkway, as it is so weird and remote
I'd forgotten about Bodmin. I picked an in-law up from there once. I forget now which one. In fact,, come to think of it, I have been to parkways Bodmin, Horwich, Luton Airport AND and Bristol. FOUR PARKWAYS. Can any pb-er beat that?
Rugby, Warwick, Worcestershire ... not that I have been to them, but those need to be added to the list.
Good, good, keep em coming...
'Worcestershire Parkway' is vague. Suggests near but not in Worcestershire.
Five! I've been to five! I can't believe I forgot Liverpool South Parkway.
Just found this handy list on Wikipedia. Though I only count stations which actually call themselves '...parkway'.
Also while I was about it edited an article which erroneously called Half Man Half Biscuit a Liverpool band.
Yes, this is wrong for Edinburgh. Gateway would be classified as a parkway, while Park is the name of the business district, not a car park.
Quite a few rural stations in the north of Scotland would classify as parkways, being at least a miles walk from the village or town centre.
I wouldn't count New Pudsey a parkway. It may be a mile or so distant from Pudsey town centre, but iirc the car park itself is pretty minimal.
"Parkways" without walking or cycling provision annoy me, especially if there is a significant population within 2 or 3 miles.
If you've gone to the massive fixed expense of owning a car, in most cases the marginal cost of driving to work is relatively too low to ever consider the train.
Otoh, with many cities and towns trying to reduce traffic, you might find Parkways really start to come into their own over the next 20 years. A free return ticket to a town centre would be a good carrot to complement all the sticks.
It is notable that the two largest numbers happened on the eve of a change of government. 1979 is the outlier.
I should imagine 1979 wasn't seen as heralding a long spell in Opposition, though. There'd been 15 years of government changing hands every 5 years or so.
PS. Amazing to think that in the last 45 years, the main Party of government has changed hands only twice. Am anticipating a third. It may be the last change in my lifetime.
But 75 of the 113 were elected as Conservatives and we haven't stopped counting yet. The Telegraph says that the record for Conservatives is 75, in 1997.
I'm already shitting myself about the 10pm SJC exit poll.
Anyone else feel the same?
Not this time. Glumly resigned.
I was fucking terrified last time though. The only news medium I could bring myself to watch was the £:$ exchange rates. If it failed to plummet, we were in the clear.
I don't think I have ever felt so relieved in my life as when Labour failed to win the 2019 GE.
They'll clearly win the 2024 one. And it will be shit. But nothing like as shit as them winning in 2019 would have been. And the obviously entirely hypothetical situation of a Conservative win would be not much to cheer.
It’s still horrible to see a spread market come up saying 150 seats though?
That’s losing 200 MPs! And 1906 was reduced to 156, so on the cusp as that record.
I reckon well under that. Skybet has 100-150 as favourite, with 50-100 and 150-200 joint secind favourite.
Spread in header says 150-158 is all we get? My maths ain’t great but that’s well over 150 losses? 🥺 100 to 150 losses would only go down to 190 at worse? I’d take that. The polling coming out is horrendous.
No, I'm talking remaining MPs rather than losses!
Yes. We are both talking different things - different markets or ways to bet - but the maths has still to add up? If not, one of the bets is a betting opportunity.
If it’s 158 seats won at election, as spread market currently says as best case, how many seat losses is that? Do they count your seat loss bet from last election finish, or cop on this parliament?
This is actually a political betting post. It’s actually on topic. 😇
CON starts at notional 372 on the new boundaries. So 158 - 372 would be 214 losses. Not dissimilar to 1906.
Indeed. One other similarity to 1906 is that it was the first election of a new reign following the death of a very long reigning monarch. 1945 was also the first election of the reign albeit for somewhat unfortunate reasons.
"A nine-year-old boy died from sepsis after doctors and nurses missed a "significant" GP note, an inquest heard.
Dylan Cope, from Newport was taken to the Grange Hospital in Cwmbran, Torfaen, on 6 December 2022 after his GP wrote “query appendicitis”, but this note was not read.
The senior doctor on shift that night said GP referrals were not being printed off and put into patients' notes because of how busy the department was.
The court also heard how Dylan’s father should have been directed to a 999 call handler, but was not due to a mistake."
The only saving grace here is that multiple independent failures were required for this awful outcome. But they happened. The whole thing is a bit more nuanced, and is worfh a read.
Every anecdote I hear from my friends who studied medicine sounds not dissimilar to the causes of this. Baffling (a) how badly the massive increase in funding is being spent and (b) the complete lack of effort to resolve the training place (post F2) jam is - for that's the main push factor among my friends, who are all at that stage.
It's not clear from the write up, or from the other bits on medical twitter if the lad was seen by any member of the medical staff at all.
GBNews sneaked out a poll from Goodwins mob, not sure of dates Lab 47 (+1) Con 20 = Ref 12 (-2) Ld 9 = Green 8 =
34 19 lead on best PM
I believe Goodwin is the only BPC pollster one is allowed to criticise on PB. Can’t remember the details but let’s just say there are question marks over his ‘methodology’.
I went to a BPC (I think) presentation and he was there - dapper, combative, wiry, a bit intense. He doesn't do the calcs, a spod from a university (his?) does. In fairness to him the values you set the polling weights to is more art than craft, and the different thing he does is to set them slightly differently.
"A nine-year-old boy died from sepsis after doctors and nurses missed a "significant" GP note, an inquest heard.
Dylan Cope, from Newport was taken to the Grange Hospital in Cwmbran, Torfaen, on 6 December 2022 after his GP wrote “query appendicitis”, but this note was not read.
The senior doctor on shift that night said GP referrals were not being printed off and put into patients' notes because of how busy the department was.
The court also heard how Dylan’s father should have been directed to a 999 call handler, but was not due to a mistake."
The only saving grace here is that multiple independent failures were required for this awful outcome. But they happened. The whole thing is a bit more nuanced, and is worfh a read.
Every anecdote I hear from my friends who studied medicine sounds not dissimilar to the causes of this. Baffling (a) how badly the massive increase in funding is being spent and (b) the complete lack of effort to resolve the training place (post F2) jam is - for that's the main push factor among my friends, who are all at that stage.
This is where (at the risk of summoning Leon again) I think the LLM's would be really make a difference. Being able to quickly surface 'oh, that's a bit odd' for 2p compared to some overworked nurse/gp/whatever pouring over their 50th patient notes of the day.
I know there are lots of papers showing LLMs are already doing well on medical stuff - but just that routine helping hand - for pennies. In 10 years I hope there aren't a lot of thesis explaining how many people could still be alive for the fear of adopting it.
But 75 of the 113 were elected as Conservatives and we haven't stopped counting yet. The Telegraph says that the record for Conservatives is 75, in 1997.
According to the Parliamentary Library it was 72. Not sure how they are counting that though. Still a long way from the 100 Labour MPs who stood down in 2010
.....More bad news for Rishi. I understand Labour are using the ultra imaginitive ad agency 'Lucky Generals' to handle their campaign. Unless they are tethered by a wary SKS brace yourselves for some very funny hard hitting ads.
That's pathetic. Feeble voiceover, no narrative, minimal impact
That's like missing an open goal from 2 inches. Crap
The issue with this type of video is that it is just listing problems. There is not one single solution given.
For example, 90% of crimes are never solved. Maybe this is true but what would Labour do to fix this?
I have a better slogan for them than change: "Labour - because it's Buggins' Turn"
It upsets political strategists, who like to think they are really insightful and creative, but the old observation that there are really only two types of campaign - "Time for Change" and "Don't Risk Change" - remains largely true.
Many a winning campaign has been light on detail, I have no doubt. A memorable poster/video or embarrassing moment with a bacon sandwich or a bigot helps us distinguish campaigns, but most of the time any old idiot could come up with most party material which is produced.
I'm wondering more if I have my notes from reading the 2019 manifestos to see if I can notice any major differences when they announce this time.
I didn’t think much of that at all. The quick reeling off of the things not quite as good in comparison, Housing crisis, prices, feeling worse off, NHS, that bit was okay, but bit with the Tory leaders that followed didn’t work at all. The voice used as voice over didn’t work, just sounded like Channel 4 news.
Not very good overall imo
The point being made is the Tories have had 14 years and 5 prime ministers and nothing to show for it. Things have got a lot worse in fact. I think the video made that point very effectively.
The gap is why should we believe Labour is any better. Is Starmer actually change or is he just like the five predecessors promising change but just the same old?
WHICH PARKWAY? THERE ARE SEVERAL. A PARKWAY STATION IS A STATION CONSTRUCTED OUT OF THE WAY SO CARS CAN DRIVE TO IT FROM TOWN INSTEAD OF DRIVING INTO TOWN AND HENCE AVOIDING CONGESTION.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I CAN THINK OF SEVERAL. BRISTOL PARKWAY? HORWICH PARKWAY? ALFRETON AND MANSFIELD PARKWAY? [Not sure that one still exists.]. WHICH PARKWAY? AND WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE OF THE LINK?
It's a forthcoming Disney documentary about Camden Town, Which is the location of THE ONLY PARKWAY WORTH TALKING ABOUT
Except maybe Bodmin Parkway, as it is so weird and remote
I'd forgotten about Bodmin. I picked an in-law up from there once. I forget now which one. In fact,, come to think of it, I have been to parkways Bodmin, Horwich, Luton Airport AND and Bristol. FOUR PARKWAYS. Can any pb-er beat that?
Rugby, Warwick, Worcestershire ... not that I have been to them, but those need to be added to the list.
Good, good, keep em coming...
'Worcestershire Parkway' is vague. Suggests near but not in Worcestershire.
Five! I've been to five! I can't believe I forgot Liverpool South Parkway.
Just found this handy list on Wikipedia. Though I only count stations which actually call themselves '...parkway'.
Also while I was about it edited an article which erroneously called Half Man Half Biscuit a Liverpool band.
Yes, this is wrong for Edinburgh. Gateway would be classified as a parkway, while Park is the name of the business district, not a car park.
Quite a few rural stations in the north of Scotland would classify as parkways, being at least a miles walk from the village or town centre.
I wouldn't count New Pudsey a parkway. It may be a mile or so distant from Pudsey town centre, but iirc the car park itself is pretty minimal.
Tiverton IIRC too. Not a huge car park.
I've only ever cycled to Tiverton Parkway. At the time, some years ago now, the cycle route took you onto the platform, without passing through the station entrance itself. This meant that, if I'd wanted to, I could have taken the train most of the way back home, but it would have been a pain to buy a ticket. As it was, I decided simply to cycle home.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 10m I'm usually fairly sceptical about the impact of campaigns on elections, but the difference in energy, professionalism, clarity.... never seen anything like it.
I'm already shitting myself about the 10pm SJC exit poll.
Anyone else feel the same?
Not this time. Glumly resigned.
I was fucking terrified last time though. The only news medium I could bring myself to watch was the £:$ exchange rates. If it failed to plummet, we were in the clear.
I don't think I have ever felt so relieved in my life as when Labour failed to win the 2019 GE.
They'll clearly win the 2024 one. And it will be shit. But nothing like as shit as them winning in 2019 would have been. And the obviously entirely hypothetical situation of a Conservative win would be not much to cheer.
It’s still horrible to see a spread market come up saying 150 seats though?
That’s losing 200 MPs! And 1906 was reduced to 156, so on the cusp as that record.
I reckon well under that. Skybet has 100-150 as favourite, with 50-100 and 150-200 joint secind favourite.
Spread in header says 150-158 is all we get? My maths ain’t great but that’s well over 150 losses? 🥺 100 to 150 losses would only go down to 190 at worse? I’d take that. The polling coming out is horrendous.
No, I'm talking remaining MPs rather than losses!
Yes. We are both talking different things - different markets or ways to bet - but the maths has still to add up? If not, one of the bets is a betting opportunity.
If it’s 158 seats won at election, as spread market currently says as best case, how many seat losses is that? Do they count your seat loss bet from last election finish, or cop on this parliament?
This is actually a political betting post. It’s actually on topic.
Well it did strike me that there was possibly an arb opportunity here, as the spreads midpoint was some way from the bookies' midpoint. 158 seats would be, what, 222 losses compared to 2019?
Let’s say 221 to avoid the nelson,
I don’t want to come all over Paddy Ashdown, but it’s hard to believe that many losses will happen.
But the polls are going to have to shift from those taken post announcement.
However The polling thing is that spread betting is driven by polls - and on PB we have proved them grouping in two ways - have we not? Tory low 20s Lab lead 20, Tory 25+ Lab lead mid teens. As it stands, one of those groups is utterly wrong, they can’t both be right, one way out compared to rivals - yet all feed in to poll of polls that 150-158 spread in header is based on. So the spread is clearly wrong, one group of polls is below 150, if their rival group right, it’s way over 160.
The spread market is a hedge, not a predictions, two different poll groupings are two very different predictive voices leading to that hedge.
For me, yougov were so completely wrong on Mayor election, but Redfield spot on, bet against the poll group with yougov in it, buy Tory seats 160-100 or 100-150 losses.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 10m I'm usually fairly sceptical about the impact of campaigns on elections, but the difference in energy, professionalism, clarity.... never seen anything like it.
WHICH PARKWAY? THERE ARE SEVERAL. A PARKWAY STATION IS A STATION CONSTRUCTED OUT OF THE WAY SO CARS CAN DRIVE TO IT FROM TOWN INSTEAD OF DRIVING INTO TOWN AND HENCE AVOIDING CONGESTION.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I CAN THINK OF SEVERAL. BRISTOL PARKWAY? HORWICH PARKWAY? ALFRETON AND MANSFIELD PARKWAY? [Not sure that one still exists.]. WHICH PARKWAY? AND WHAT IS THE RELEVANCE OF THE LINK?
It's a forthcoming Disney documentary about Camden Town, Which is the location of THE ONLY PARKWAY WORTH TALKING ABOUT
Except maybe Bodmin Parkway, as it is so weird and remote
I'd forgotten about Bodmin. I picked an in-law up from there once. I forget now which one. In fact,, come to think of it, I have been to parkways Bodmin, Horwich, Luton Airport AND and Bristol. FOUR PARKWAYS. Can any pb-er beat that?
Rugby, Warwick, Worcestershire ... not that I have been to them, but those need to be added to the list.
Good, good, keep em coming...
'Worcestershire Parkway' is vague. Suggests near but not in Worcestershire.
Didcot Parkway Southampton Airport Parkway Tiverton Parkway Liverpool South Parkway Oxford Parkway East Midlands Parkway Port Talbot Parkway Tame Bridge Parkway Warwick Parkway Haddenham & Thame Parkway Buckshaw Parkway Whittlesford Parkway Coleshill Parkway Sutton Parkway Stratford-upon-Avon Parkway Aylesbury Vale Parkway Ebbw Vale Parkway Thanet Parkway
I have been to Didcot, Southampton Airport, Oxford, Tame Bridge, Aylesbury Vale, Luton Airport, and Bristol.
I doubted I would beat Sunil, tbh. I was hoping he'd be so train-orientated that he'd only ever pass through parkways rather than get on or off.
I'm already shitting myself about the 10pm SJC exit poll.
Anyone else feel the same?
Not this time. Glumly resigned.
I was fucking terrified last time though. The only news medium I could bring myself to watch was the £:$ exchange rates. If it failed to plummet, we were in the clear.
I don't think I have ever felt so relieved in my life as when Labour failed to win the 2019 GE.
They'll clearly win the 2024 one. And it will be shit. But nothing like as shit as them winning in 2019 would have been. And the obviously entirely hypothetical situation of a Conservative win would be not much to cheer.
It’s still horrible to see a spread market come up saying 150 seats though?
That’s losing 200 MPs! And 1906 was reduced to 156, so on the cusp as that record.
I reckon well under that. Skybet has 100-150 as favourite, with 50-100 and 150-200 joint secind favourite.
Spread in header says 150-158 is all we get? My maths ain’t great but that’s well over 150 losses? 🥺 100 to 150 losses would only go down to 190 at worse? I’d take that. The polling coming out is horrendous.
No, I'm talking remaining MPs rather than losses!
Yes. We are both talking different things - different markets or ways to bet - but the maths has still to add up? If not, one of the bets is a betting opportunity.
If it’s 158 seats won at election, as spread market currently says as best case, how many seat losses is that? Do they count your seat loss bet from last election finish, or cop on this parliament?
This is actually a political betting post. It’s actually on topic.
Well it did strike me that there was possibly an arb opportunity here, as the spreads midpoint was some way from the bookies' midpoint. 158 seats would be, what, 222 losses compared to 2019?
Let’s say 221 to avoid the nelson,
I don’t want to come all over Paddy Ashdown, but it’s hard to believe that many losses will happen.
But the polls are going to have to shift from those taken post announcement.
However The polling thing is that spread betting is driven by polls - and on PB we have proved them grouping in two ways - have we not? Tory low 20s Lab lead 20, Tory 25+ Lab lead mid teens. As it stands, one of those groups is utterly wrong, they can’t both be right, one way out compared to rivals - yet all feed in to poll of polls that 150-158 spread in header is based on. So the spread is clearly wrong, one group of polls is below 150, if their rival group right, it’s way over 160.
The spread market is a hedge, not a predictions, two different poll groupings are two very different predictive voices leading to that hedge.
For me, yougov were so completely wrong on Mayor election, but Redfield spot on, bet against the poll group with yougov in it, buy Tory seats 160-100 or 100-150 losses.
A stat was posted on twitter Avg leads Pollsters who do not adjust Lab 25 Pollsters who force choice Lab 19 Pollsters who reallocate DKs by 2019 vote Lab 17
Reading a story about the US Supreme Court overturning a lower court ruling against a gerrymandered congressional map, and it claimed that the previous ruling was it was illegal as it was a racial gerrymander, but the top court said it was just a political gerrymander, which apparently is nice and legal.
I don't know why that surprises me, given the rampant gerrymandering in US congressional maps, I guess I just assumed there was always a pretext it was not done to benefit one side or the other, however flimsy such a pretext would be, but apparently it's pretty upfront.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 10m I'm usually fairly sceptical about the impact of campaigns on elections, but the difference in energy, professionalism, clarity.... never seen anything like it.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
1997 didn't have the constant social media echo chamber and self reinforcing 'facts' How the politically more disengaged are viewing it will be very different
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 10m I'm usually fairly sceptical about the impact of campaigns on elections, but the difference in energy, professionalism, clarity.... never seen anything like it.
To be fair Starmer could piss on a pensioner and Freedman would clap like a sea lion
You have to understand, only Starmer could piss on a pensioner in such a calm, collected and professional way.
Presumably he'd deploy some form of measuring jug to ensure even distribution. And do it with a prominent Union flag behind him to reassure the patriotic voters that the party has moved on from Corbyn.
I didn’t think much of that at all. The quick reeling off of the things not quite as good in comparison, Housing crisis, prices, feeling worse off, NHS, that bit was okay, but bit with the Tory leaders that followed didn’t work at all. The voice used as voice over didn’t work, just sounded like Channel 4 news.
Not very good overall imo
The point being made is the Tories have had 14 years and 5 prime ministers and nothing to show for it. Things have got a lot worse in fact. I think the video made that point very effectively.
The gap is why should we believe Labour is any better. Is Starmer actually change or is he just like the five predecessors promising change but just the same old?
It's not clear to me that things have got worse, or that if they have they have done so more than other comparable countries.
It is clear however that Britain during the last 14 years has got a lot more left wing. State spending up, state interference in people's lives up, identity politics on the rise, immigration a free for all, massive spending on renewables (I favour this last one, actually).
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
Was 1997 a terrible campaign? I don't know I wasn't here, but it seems the Tories closed the gap a bit. 2017 seems to be the benchmark. From memory everything proceeded as expected until about 2 weeks into it. Then dementia tax and Tranmere.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
🤔 Well I have a job now, don’t live with my parents, have definitively completed puberty, and don’t have to do PE or Integrated Humanities. Those are in the plus column. But popular music is worse. TV is better but film is worse, and fashion is a score draw.
Over all I think it feels better.
Oh sorry, you meant with respect to the election? No idea, other than I wasn’t expecting the amount of D:Ream heard to also be a score draw.
i'll be honest, Day One did start me wondering if this was feasible. Not sure what happens in a campaign where neither of them are particularly great campaigners (but one starts so far ahead that barely matters)
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
I was a lot greener, but that felt optimistic. I was an instinctive little Tory boy, but one still felt Blair would be a positive change. That notion was dispelled fairly fast once he took power. It doesn't feel like that to me at the moment particularly.
Sam Freedman @Samfr · 10m I'm usually fairly sceptical about the impact of campaigns on elections, but the difference in energy, professionalism, clarity.... never seen anything like it.
To be fair Starmer could piss on a pensioner and Freedman would clap like a sea lion
You have to understand, only Starmer could piss on a pensioner in such a calm, collected and professional way.
Presumably he'd deploy some form of measuring jug to ensure even distribution. And do it with a prominent Union flag behind him to reassure the patriotic voters that the party has moved on from Corbyn.
It'd be a change from pissing on families and young people and non-houseowners [edit] with a hosepipe.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
Well in 1997 the opening of the campaign involved a massive row about Major proroguing Parliament to avoid debating a standards report into Cash for Questions. The furore resulted in Martin Bell standing in Tatton. This is relatively tame in comparison.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
LAB had huge poll leads at the start of 1997 sometimes 25% +. Perhaps even more than now.
But CON campaigning feels flatter now than then. Even though in hindsight the result was certain.
So bad start for CON but LAB yet to be fully scrutinised.
As I recall the 1997 Con campaign, there werebasically two people trying: John Major and William Hague. And occasionally Peter Lilley and Malcolm Rifkind. Everyone else was either indifferent or dreadful. That stillplaces 1997 ahead of Con 2024, mind.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
I'm not sure it's *that* bad, but Sunak had the advantage over everyone else of knowing that he was calling the election, so you might think he would have been a bit better prepared for doing so, and had a bit more convincing a pitch for voters.
So it does feel like he's completely blown the benefit of being able to choose the election date.
A comparison with 1997 is completely impossible btw. It's a completely different media world, the pace of news is so much faster it's unreal. I remember in 1998 or 1999, it made completely normal sense to pick up a copy of the first edition of tomorrow's newspaper when I was returning home from an evening in central London - and you'd expect to actually have some news in the thing.
We're still only just into hour 31 of the election campaign. It's barely started.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
Very different.
There was a lot more optimism and positivity in 1997.
It wasn't just fear.
The difference is that 1997 there was room and expectation for things to get significantly better. Now it is more about stopping things getting shitter.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
Very different.
There was a lot more optimism and positivity in 1997.
It wasn't just fear.
The difference is that 1997 there was room and expectation for things to get significantly better. Now it is more about stopping things getting shitter.
Polls on public optimism still show the age old pattern though: everyone says the country is bad and getting worse, i.e. going to the dogs, but is much more optimistic about their own household's prospects.
The own household optimism is less than it was through most of the last 2 decades but is still OK. But the prognosis for the country and the world, almost certainly fuelled by social media, is significantly worse. That's why incumbents are getting battered globally and probably why Biden will struggle to get re-elected.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
Very different.
There was a lot more optimism and positivity in 1997.
It wasn't just fear.
The difference is that 1997 there was room and expectation for things to get significantly better. Now it is more about stopping things getting shitter.
Polls on public optimism still show the age old pattern though: everyone says the country is bad and getting worse, i.e. going to the dogs, but is much more optimistic about their own household's prospects.
The own household optimism is less than it was through most of the last 2 decades but is still OK. But the prognosis for the country and the world, almost certainly fuelled by social media, is significantly worse. That's why incumbents are getting battered globally and probably why Biden will struggle to get re-elected.
Its not just social media mirage, it is real interaction with the world. If you don't own significant assets, life has been and will continue to be shit for the foreseeable future across the western world.
Sunak had the advantage over everyone else of knowing that he was calling the election, so you might think he would have been a bit better prepared for doing so
Like making sure he had candidates in every seat, for example...
One point on which almost the entirely of PB has been wrong (so far). Sunak and the Tories are not going all out negative and culture war, or all out tax giveaways. It's quite an old fashioned appeal to stick with the incumbent for fear of the opposition who might mess things up. It's 1997 Major.
No withdrawal from the ECHR. No slashing of inheritance tax. No confected row with the EU. Not even a rehashing of Starmer defending terrorists, yet.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
I was a lot greener, but that felt optimistic. I was an instinctive little Tory boy, but one still felt Blair would be a positive change. That notion was dispelled fairly fast once he took power. It doesn't feel like that to me at the moment particularly.
The weird thing is the UK economy was actually starting to do well by 1997, after the total chaos of the early 90s. So there was a real optimism in the air that just isn't there now. By 1997 it felt like the first day of Spring, whereas economically speaking it feels like we're in the January of a grim winter that's been the January of a grim winter for at least the last three years. With little hope of anything getting better.
They say it's darkest before the dawn and all that, but as others have pointed out the sense of optimism that was there in '97 just isn't there today. It's less "things can only get better" and "well if the other lot get in, things can hardly get worse".
Sunak had the advantage over everyone else of knowing that he was calling the election, so you might think he would have been a bit better prepared for doing so
Like making sure he had candidates in every seat, for example...
Perhaps there is no better illustration that this idea that Sunak and Tories have stuck to a plan is bollocks than that Sunak had to resort to the restoration of the PM's right to ask for dissolution that his party had only recently got rid of under Fixed Term bollocks Act.
"Breaking: Keir Starmer has agreed to take part in two head-to-head election TV debates with Rishi Sunak on the BBC and ITV.
Labour sources: "Labour will not be tearing up the format established in previous elections just to suit this week’s whims of the Tory Party." PM was pushing for weekly debates.
This has to be one of the worst starts to a political campaign in history. How does it feel compared to 1997?
Very different.
There was a lot more optimism and positivity in 1997.
It wasn't just fear.
The difference is that 1997 there was room and expectation for things to get significantly better. Now it is more about stopping things getting shitter.
Polls on public optimism still show the age old pattern though: everyone says the country is bad and getting worse, i.e. going to the dogs, but is much more optimistic about their own household's prospects.
The own household optimism is less than it was through most of the last 2 decades but is still OK. But the prognosis for the country and the world, almost certainly fuelled by social media, is significantly worse. That's why incumbents are getting battered globally and probably why Biden will struggle to get re-elected.
Its not just social media mirage, it is real interaction with the world. If you don't own significant assets, life has been and will continue to be shit for the foreseeable future across the western world.
My point was people are still reporting far more optimism for their own household than for the country or world. That gap is surely social (and traditional) media-modulated.
One point on which almost the entirely of PB has been wrong (so far). Sunak and the Tories are not going all out negative and culture war, or all out tax giveaways. It's quite an old fashioned appeal to stick with the incumbent for fear of the opposition who might mess things up. It's 1997 Major.
No withdrawal from the ECHR. No slashing of inheritance tax. No confected row with the EU. Not even a rehashing of Starmer defending terrorists, yet.
Its like they have given up, called a GE on a whim and don't really have a detailed plan of attack.
My Party has made some policy announcements today. Green Party Policies.
• Renationalising our NHS • £70bn Wealth Tax • 500,000 Council Homes • £16 per hour min wage • Universal Basic Income • Rent Controls • Abolishing Tuition Fees • Recognition of Palestine • Free Secondary School Meals • Axe Two-Child Cap
Top Party and most people won't have a clue what they stand for.
I do confess that I misread the second point as "£70bn Welsh Tax"
Talking of which did anyone else watch The Way? I liked it.
Weird but different. Bravo for BBC for making it.
About time they did something brave in drama.
I'm so old i remember Potter and Play for Today and so on.
At its heart, a James Graham script of family breakdown both funny and convincing, and affecting, directed by Michael Sheen, Actors directing actors equals acting - Sophie Melville caught my eye. But it was fortified by thoughtful bits presumably from Adam Curtis, that probably actually is bizarre but true? States going through civil war the state broadcaster just puts on patriotic feel good things? Everyday around the world people are having to flee their home towns? And they got a data dump on stick with long lost photo’s they thought they had lost but must have uploaded to a cloud at sometime, that the state could quickly gather up on them. Even where they tried to tell it in manner of old fashioned bedtime tale - like rumour of a Welsh Catcher patrolling the border so no Welsh could sneak out - worked as well.
Some of the best art is a Black Mirror, we see our world in it, differently, pick up on what we overlook. If no one has seen The Way, I recommend it. James Graham is quite the genius, how can he know how people really tick and how the world works as well as he does? I heard him on Desert Island Disks, he comes from humble background. The story of the spanking vicar on ice doing a tour of the contests is going to be hysterical when he does the autobiography screenplay of his life. Which he has to do, as we will learn so much about ourselves and our world from it.
Ben Walker @BNHWalker · 9h Britain Predicts finds more than half of the 100-150 seats the Tories are currently forecast to hold will be with majorities of 5pts or less.
In other words, if the polls do not change, the government is an error margin away from near annihilation.
"Breaking: Keir Starmer has agreed to take part in two head-to-head election TV debates with Rishi Sunak on the BBC and ITV.
Labour sources: "Labour will not be tearing up the format established in previous elections just to suit this week’s whims of the Tory Party." PM was pushing for weekly debates.
“We need to nationalise these companies if they continue to fail on the scale that they are”
Broadcaster Tim Montgomerie says he “won’t defend” water companies who have “all gain... and no cost” and shareholders must “pay the price” for problems
One point on which almost the entirely of PB has been wrong (so far). Sunak and the Tories are not going all out negative and culture war, or all out tax giveaways. It's quite an old fashioned appeal to stick with the incumbent for fear of the opposition who might mess things up. It's 1997 Major.
No withdrawal from the ECHR. No slashing of inheritance tax. No confected row with the EU. Not even a rehashing of Starmer defending terrorists, yet.
One point on which almost the entirely of PB has been wrong (so far). Sunak and the Tories are not going all out negative and culture war, or all out tax giveaways. It's quite an old fashioned appeal to stick with the incumbent for fear of the opposition who might mess things up. It's 1997 Major.
No withdrawal from the ECHR. No slashing of inheritance tax. No confected row with the EU. Not even a rehashing of Starmer defending terrorists, yet.
One warning on this. Nowadays, the most negative stuff can be put out on targeted social media through astroturf groups, and that way the party behind it, doesn't suffer the negative consequence of going negative.
And it also means, if you aren't the intended target of the message, you probably won't see it.
One point on which almost the entirely of PB has been wrong (so far). Sunak and the Tories are not going all out negative and culture war, or all out tax giveaways. It's quite an old fashioned appeal to stick with the incumbent for fear of the opposition who might mess things up. It's 1997 Major.
No withdrawal from the ECHR. No slashing of inheritance tax. No confected row with the EU. Not even a rehashing of Starmer defending terrorists, yet.
Its like they have given up, called a GE on a whim and don't really have a detailed plan of attack.
They are mentally defeated already. Or it's some genius rope-a-dope strategy.
Sunak had the advantage over everyone else of knowing that he was calling the election, so you might think he would have been a bit better prepared for doing so
Like making sure he had candidates in every seat, for example...
Or an umbrella in the hallway.
I was wrong, in the argument I pushed it was scientific long planned decision making, as PB we could second guess. a very small clique likely made their minds up to call it, within about 30 hours of the announcement. 🤦♀️
One point on which almost the entirely of PB has been wrong (so far). Sunak and the Tories are not going all out negative and culture war, or all out tax giveaways. It's quite an old fashioned appeal to stick with the incumbent for fear of the opposition who might mess things up. It's 1997 Major.
No withdrawal from the ECHR. No slashing of inheritance tax. No confected row with the EU. Not even a rehashing of Starmer defending terrorists, yet.
Eh? We haven't seen the manifesto yet
Culture War will be on the grid for the week that postal votes go out.
One point on which almost the entirely of PB has been wrong (so far). Sunak and the Tories are not going all out negative and culture war, or all out tax giveaways. It's quite an old fashioned appeal to stick with the incumbent for fear of the opposition who might mess things up. It's 1997 Major.
No withdrawal from the ECHR. No slashing of inheritance tax. No confected row with the EU. Not even a rehashing of Starmer defending terrorists, yet.
Its like they have given up, called a GE on a whim and don't really have a detailed plan of attack.
They are mentally defeated already. Or it's some genius rope-a-dope strategy.
Or have checked out, have something else lined up and so it doesn't really matter one way or another (particularly as it isn't Jezza on the ballot, its another technocrat to deal with all the shit coming down the pipe).
She's been the one to watch for a while now I think.
But no vacancy for ten years by looks of things.
Even those in seemingly very strong positions struggle to last that long, our body politic seems to be pretty ruthless in placing unofficial limitations on party leaders.
Comments
For example, 90% of crimes are never solved. Maybe this is true but what would Labour do to fix this?
I have a better slogan for them than change: "Labour - because it's Buggins' Turn"
If it’s 158 seats won at election, as spread market currently says as best case, how many seat losses is that?
Do they count your seat loss bet from last election finish, or cop on this parliament?
This is actually a political betting post. It’s actually on topic. 😇
158 seats would be, what, 222 losses compared to 2019?
GE and number of MPs not seeking relection
2019 74
2017 31
2015 90
2010 149
2005 86
2001 78
1997 117
1992 79
1987 88
1983 77
1979 61
It's a bit like football fans calling for the Manager's head.
Who do you want who would be better and is willing? It's a killer question when you are mid table.
When the performance has been as shambolic as this lot for 14 years, any bugger else is a sufficient answer.
Just be mildly relieved that Comrade Jez didn't manage to hang around after 2019, or pass the torch on to a younger version.
And as Ben said, regarding that pressure group, where’s the green policies and initiatives for a world facing climate emergency?
The whole point of being a political party is to explain your own policies on issues what matters to you. 2024 election Greens are going to get into a mess over being the sympathy for Gaza party rather than Green Party and probably, quite rightly, get no seats.
They started the 1997 election campaign at about 12-13% in the polls, half the level they'd achieved in 1983 and 1987, and a third less than 1992.
I bought the LibDems on the spreads (thanks OGH!) at about 23 or 24, thinking they'd end up around 30, and was very pleasantly surprised to find myself making what I considered to be a small fortune.
@Samfr
·
10m
I'm usually fairly sceptical about the impact of campaigns on elections, but the difference in energy, professionalism, clarity.... never seen anything like it.
https://x.com/Samfr/status/1793755014428766214
Based on Neil's own figure of 70, the number of Tory MPs not standing again at this election is still slightly less than the 72 who stood down in 1997.
All have Lab plus one
Two have Con unchanged, Techne Con down 2
Ref up 2 or down 2 depending who you look at
LD and Green as you were
If you've gone to the massive fixed expense of owning a car, in most cases the marginal cost of driving to work is relatively too low to ever consider the train.
Otoh, with many cities and towns trying to reduce traffic, you might find Parkways really start to come into their own over the next 20 years. A free return ticket to a town centre would be a good carrot to complement all the sticks.
PS. Amazing to think that in the last 45 years, the main Party of government has changed hands only twice.
Am anticipating a third. It may be the last change in my lifetime.
It wouldn't surprise me if he wasn't.
I know there are lots of papers showing LLMs are already doing well on medical stuff - but just that routine helping hand - for pennies. In 10 years I hope there aren't a lot of thesis explaining how many people could still be alive for the fear of adopting it.
26% record Labour lead.
Could this election be like 2017, with Labour getting stronger as they define their policies more clearly in the final weeks?
https://x.com/Samfr/status/1793712476816912724
S
Many a winning campaign has been light on detail, I have no doubt. A memorable poster/video or embarrassing moment with a bacon sandwich or a bigot helps us distinguish campaigns, but most of the time any old idiot could come up with most party material which is produced.
I'm wondering more if I have my notes from reading the 2019 manifestos to see if I can notice any major differences when they announce this time.
The gap is why should we believe Labour is any better. Is Starmer actually change or is he just like the five predecessors promising change but just the same old?
I don’t want to come all over Paddy Ashdown, but it’s hard to believe that many losses will happen.
But the polls are going to have to shift from those taken post announcement.
However The polling thing is that spread betting is driven by polls - and on PB we have proved them grouping in two ways - have we not? Tory low 20s Lab lead 20, Tory 25+ Lab lead mid teens. As it stands, one of those groups is utterly wrong, they can’t both be right, one way out compared to rivals - yet all feed in to poll of polls that 150-158 spread in header is based on. So the spread is clearly wrong, one group of polls is below 150, if their rival group right, it’s way over 160.
The spread market is a hedge, not a predictions, two different poll groupings are two very different predictive voices leading to that hedge.
For me, yougov were so completely wrong on Mayor election, but Redfield spot on, bet against the poll group with yougov in it, buy Tory seats 160-100 or 100-150 losses.
Avg leads
Pollsters who do not adjust Lab 25
Pollsters who force choice Lab 19
Pollsters who reallocate DKs by 2019 vote Lab 17
Popcorn.
Phillipson and LibDem Daisy both good.
I don't know why that surprises me, given the rampant gerrymandering in US congressional maps, I guess I just assumed there was always a pretext it was not done to benefit one side or the other, however flimsy such a pretext would be, but apparently it's pretty upfront.
About time they did something brave in drama.
I'm so old i remember Potter and Play for Today and so on.
How the politically more disengaged are viewing it will be very different
But CON campaigning feels flatter now than then. Even though in hindsight the result was certain.
So bad start for CON but LAB yet to be fully scrutinised.
There was a lot more optimism and positivity in 1997.
It wasn't just fear.
It is clear however that Britain during the last 14 years has got a lot more left wing. State spending up, state interference in people's lives up, identity politics on the rise, immigration a free for all, massive spending on renewables (I favour this last one, actually).
2017 seems to be the benchmark. From memory everything proceeded as expected until about 2 weeks into it.
Then dementia tax and Tranmere.
Over all I think it feels better.
Oh sorry, you meant with respect to the election? No idea, other than I wasn’t expecting the amount of D:Ream heard to also be a score draw.
People assume campaign will narrow the polls. I dont think the case for that is strong. Possibility campaign widens the polls further is underpriced.
@gabyhinsliff
i'll be honest, Day One did start me wondering if this was feasible. Not sure what happens in a campaign where neither of them are particularly great campaigners (but one starts so far ahead that barely matters)
That stillplaces 1997 ahead of Con 2024, mind.
So it does feel like he's completely blown the benefit of being able to choose the election date.
A comparison with 1997 is completely impossible btw. It's a completely different media world, the pace of news is so much faster it's unreal. I remember in 1998 or 1999, it made completely normal sense to pick up a copy of the first edition of tomorrow's newspaper when I was returning home from an evening in central London - and you'd expect to actually have some news in the thing.
We're still only just into hour 31 of the election campaign. It's barely started.
No one likes CON cos they're useless
Everyone is apparently loving LAB who are about 60% ahead but in reality there's no enthusiasm for them
The economic position really isn't that good, inflation is going to go up again, interest rates aren't going to fall and there is no money
And I don't think England will win Euro 2024!
The own household optimism is less than it was through most of the last 2 decades but is still OK. But the prognosis for the country and the world, almost certainly fuelled by social media, is significantly worse. That's why incumbents are getting battered globally and probably why Biden will struggle to get re-elected.
No withdrawal from the ECHR. No slashing of inheritance tax. No confected row with the EU. Not even a rehashing of Starmer defending terrorists, yet.
They say it's darkest before the dawn and all that, but as others have pointed out the sense of optimism that was there in '97 just isn't there today. It's less "things can only get better" and "well if the other lot get in, things can hardly get worse".
Labour sources: "Labour will not be tearing up the format established in previous elections just to suit this week’s whims of the Tory Party." PM was pushing for weekly debates.
#Newsnight"
https://x.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1793770268596277679
Some of the best art is a Black Mirror, we see our world in it, differently, pick up on what we overlook. If no one has seen The Way, I recommend it. James Graham is quite the genius, how can he know how people really tick and how the world works as well as he does? I heard him on Desert Island Disks, he comes from humble background. The story of the spanking vicar on ice doing a tour of the contests is going to be hysterical when he does the autobiography screenplay of his life. Which he has to do, as we will learn so much about ourselves and our world from it.
Ben Walker
@BNHWalker
·
9h
Britain Predicts finds more than half of the 100-150 seats the Tories are currently forecast to hold will be with majorities of 5pts or less.
In other words, if the polls do not change, the government is an error margin away from near annihilation.
https://x.com/BNHWalker/status/1793623598927933575
Broadcaster Tim Montgomerie says he “won’t defend” water companies who have “all gain... and no cost” and shareholders must “pay the price” for problems
https://x.com/bbcquestiontime/status/1793768005299532243
It has gone so wrong that even Tim now supports nationalisation. He is now more left wing than Labour on this issue, baffling
And it also means, if you aren't the intended target of the message, you probably won't see it.
But no vacancy for ten years by looks of things.
I was wrong, in the argument I pushed it was scientific long planned decision making, as PB we could second guess. a very small clique likely made their minds up to call it, within about 30 hours of the announcement. 🤦♀️
https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/1793593969651425365?t=dX6y6f2ADbdAbZNL-musoQ&s=19