Howdy, Stranger!

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

What to do if and when crossover happens – politicalbetting.com

1235711

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099
    Heathener said:

    True but 15 polls is a large sample size?
    As has been said before, if don't knows switch to Reform on the back of Farage's announcement Labour's % will go down... even if not a single voter abandons them.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,047

    No, but why would the King appoint a new PM in the middle of a GE campaign just because the Tories changed their leader? The cleanest way to mange is that Sunak stays PM and hands over to the election winner.
    It is, unless he quits.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,047
    DougSeal said:

    Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
    Because the rest of his provisional government and his ministers are Conservative ones - there can't not be a government at any time - and a Labour PM couldn't command them or their confidence for the intervening weeks.

    Same principles apply.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    edited June 2024
    Gonna play devil’s advocate for a mo’

    You do all realise, don’t you, that in 1997 the Labour leads were almost comparable to 2024 at the same stage? The difference was a few more in the mid teens. They didn’t narrow until two weeks out and then, in the real deal, it wound up at 12.5%

    Are you sure we’re not all overdoing this? That in fact this will be closer to the 1997 result? Corollary, the RefUK ‘surge’ is about as real as the YouthQuake?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election

  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    DougSeal said:

    Understood. But what constitutional principle requires the King to appoint Cameron as opposed to, say, Angela Smith, Baroness Smith of Basildon, who is the leader of the Labour Party in the Lords? There’s nothing binding him to the choice of Cameron as no one has a Commons majority.
    The King would refuse the resignation initially as nobody can demonstrate the confidence of the House of his subjects representatives whilst it does not sit, remind Sunak of his responsibility to the nation. If Sunak insisted he'd probably only be able to appoint from within the government and on a caretaker basis. Or perhaps would exercise the reserved powers personally with the help of the Privy Council pending the election.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    edited June 2024
    ydoethur said:

    Hmmmm.

    The Institute for Government doesn't agree.

    Peerages are held until a person’s death, but the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 allows peers to resign as sitting members. To do this, they must give written notice to the clerk of the parliaments – the most senior impartial official in the Lords. Resignations cannot be rescinded. Giving up membership of the House of Lords is separate from giving up a peerage, however. Life peerages cannot be relinquished.

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/joining-and-leaving-house-lords

    Not sure whether that would make a life peer eligible for the Commons?
    Oh that is interesting. Seems unjust, I guess it has just never come up.

    Sunak definitely should have ennobled Farage!
  • Leon said:

    Finally, some respect. For i am He. The LEONDAMUS. And verily I say: there floweth a river in Kyiv, and it is mighty, e’en though thou never heardst of it, for some reasoneth, honestly, what are thee like, call thyself a travel scribe
    Trying to top Rogerdamus the shame... the shame...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    AlsoLei said:

    Ah, fair enough. Hard to see how it would be introduced without causing a vast rumpus - look at how many recipes specify Kosher salt to avoid the iodine, even though we don't have iodised salt in the UK.

    I could see people switching to dishwasher salt in order to avoid the woke potassium!
    More significantly it is dangerous to those with renal impairment, though they probably shouldn't be adding salt anyway. Similarly those on ACE inhibitors unless carefully discussed with their doctor.

  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,505
    Scott_xP said:

    A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”

    There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain.
    Advertisement

    While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/infighting-on-the-beaches-behind-the-scenes-of-the-d-day-debacle-6rlvt8nr6

    Not behind a paywall today

    Advised not to travel, and in pain? Is the King's condition worse than we've been being told?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,081
    @OpiniumResearch
    🚨 Our latest polling with
    @ObserverUK


    The Labour lead is now 18 points
    · Labour 42% (-3)
    · Conservatives 24% (-1)
    · Lib Dems 10% (+2)
    · SNP 3% (n/c)
    · Greens 7% (+1)
    · Reform 12% (+1)

    Fieldwork: 5 - 7 June.
    Changes from 29 - 31 May.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173
    Scott_xP said:

    A Whitehall source said Cameron was “apoplectic” about Sunak’s decision but, when asked why he had not “picked Sunak up by his lapels”, he said: “There is only so much I can do.”

    There was also fury at Buckingham Palace, where courtiers pointed out that the King, who is being treated for cancer, was advised not to travel but was determined to do so, despite being in pain.
    Advertisement

    While the Tories are this weekend engaged in a circular firing squad to identify who to blame, the truth is, as one insider put it, everyone’s hands are covered in blood. The issue of what to do was debated in the three-day look-ahead meeting in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) at 1pm on Monday at which all Sunak’s key aides were present, including Isaac Levido, his campaign director, Liam Booth-Smith, the Downing Street chief of staff, and James Forsyth, his political secretary.


    https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/infighting-on-the-beaches-behind-the-scenes-of-the-d-day-debacle-6rlvt8nr6

    Not behind a paywall today

    The fact that the King did what was required of him, when he actually had a reasonable excuse to leave it to the Prince of Wales, is not much remarked upon but only serves to make cut-and-run Rishi look even worse.

    Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,641
    ydoethur said:

    Hmmmm.

    The Institute for Government doesn't agree.

    Peerages are held until a person’s death, but the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 allows peers to resign as sitting members. To do this, they must give written notice to the clerk of the parliaments – the most senior impartial official in the Lords. Resignations cannot be rescinded. Giving up membership of the House of Lords is separate from giving up a peerage, however. Life peerages cannot be relinquished.

    https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/joining-and-leaving-house-lords

    Not sure whether that would make a life peer eligible for the Commons?
    Life peers cannot renounce their peerages but they can renounce their right to sit in the House of Lords, and then stand for election to the Commons. But the deadline was yesterday so he's missed it.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,047
    Scott_xP said:

    @OpiniumResearch
    🚨 Our latest polling with
    @ObserverUK


    The Labour lead is now 18 points
    · Labour 42% (-3)
    · Conservatives 24% (-1)
    · Lib Dems 10% (+2)
    · SNP 3% (n/c)
    · Greens 7% (+1)
    · Reform 12% (+1)

    Fieldwork: 5 - 7 June.
    Changes from 29 - 31 May.

    Tiny tiny trend of Labour leads being clipped a bit.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    edited June 2024

    The King would refuse the resignation initially as nobody can demonstrate the confidence of the House of his subjects representatives whilst it does not sit, remind Sunak of his responsibility to the nation. If Sunak insisted he'd probably only be able to appoint from within the government and on a caretaker basis. Or perhaps would exercise the reserved powers personally with the help of the Privy Council pending the election.
    In absolute extremis, rather than your last option I reckon you’d pick a non-political but qualified Lord rather than him do it. Gus O’Donnell say. Everyone would believe he’d be a caretaker only, so he’d command the notional parliament until Starmer kissed hands, and it keeps the King clean.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968

    As has been said before, if don't knows switch to Reform on the back of Farage's announcement Labour's % will go down... even if not a single voter abandons them.
    True. But so much battleground is Tory v Labour, if Don’t Knows break Ref instead of Tory, both % down, gap the same.

    The important thing is Tory share = votes. Low share means low votes means bloody ‘ell

    Watch the Tory share in all polls, not gaps.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,047
    Farooq said:

    We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
    Which is why earlier today and yesterday (when panic was at a peak) was a great time to buy.
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337

    Well we have had four polls covering the actual leaving early and yesterday when the row really blew up and nothing 'obvious' showing up yet. More in Common did an extra few hundred responses to capture yesterday after the apology and Luke Tryl suggested whilst not enough data to be sure, Labour were maybe a bit further ahead on Fridays responses. Other pollsters seem to think it will have a profound effect this week. Mondays Delta and Redfield to shed some light? Unless any come out tonight with more work today
    A lot of people polled on Friday, who had heard the news on Radio 2 or Greatest Hits Radio at 7am and gone to work, will have been blissfully unaware. It didn’t kick off properly until he apologised.. what, around 9am? He should probably be grateful for the IDF rescuing/killing some people to stop it leading as much today and filling a whole two-day sample window.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173
    AlsoLei said:

    Advised not to travel, and in pain? Is the King's condition worse than we've been being told?
    Not necessarily. I doubt anyone would advise that a 75 year old in his condition attempt to travel and participate in an event such as that.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    TimS said:

    I wouldn’t describe HYUFD as the Tories biggest cheerleader. He’s avowedly partisan, but in far less of an “I know best” way than most.

    One of the most objective and insightful partisan commentators on here, up there with Nick Palmer when he’s not talking up Labour prospects in Lib Dem targets.
    HYUFD is usually happy to be a cheerleader. But he knows when not to push it too far!
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    Farooq said:

    We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
    You think they’ll be fourth?
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085

    Which is why earlier today and yesterday (when panic was at a peak) was a great time to buy.
    I agree with you (finally)

    A very good time to buy
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,641

    If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.

    Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
    Which brings us back to Oliver Dowden as the most likely successor but barring accidents with buses, this will not happen.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968
    edited June 2024

    Tiny tiny trend of Labour leads being clipped a bit.
    Tory share going backwards.

    But what it really looks like is the two blocks shuffling beach towels on sun loungers.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639

    If Sunak resigned as PM the King would take his advice on his successor which, given there's a Tory government already in place as the King's ministers, would be a Tory until such time as the lay of the land of the new HoC was clear post election.

    Whereupon another resignation and appointment might take place.
    Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.

    The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.

    If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    DougSeal said:

    Does CR realise that being leader of the Tories and PM are, technically, two separate roles?
    Just wait until the next Tory leader comes in and maybe they will legally combine the two?

    (No I don't really believe that, though I know people who would).
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,641
    pigeon said:

    The fact that the King did what was required of him, when he actually had a reasonable excuse to leave it to the Prince of Wales, is not much remarked upon but only serves to make cut-and-run Rishi look even worse.

    Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
    Like almost every aspect of the Conservative election campaign, starting with calling the election six months early, it makes no sense. Nothing makes sense; nothing is rational.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    Farooq said:

    We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
    0 seats is madness. Sub 100 is unlikely but not madness.

    Election campaigns are more fun if you allow yourself to get carried away and overdo it anyway. So long as you don't base your betting position on it!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099

    Tiny tiny trend of Labour leads being clipped a bit.
    True indeed. The full impact of D-Daygate is not in this poll though.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968
    biggles said:

    No. With modern sampling techniques, and sample sizes, you’re almost certainly seeing movement in that time series, albeit up and then down again. It’s not MOE noise.
    Also they changed their methodology during the sequence. Which instantly looked very harsh on Labour, drastically down where other pollsters had given them a good week.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,636
    DougSeal said:

    Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.

    The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.

    If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
    That can't be right, surely? What if Sunak got hit by a bus? Surely the monarch would in practice just appoint the least controversial choice - which would surely be a cabinet member. Hunt, probably.
    He could in principle appoint who he likes, but there are lots of things he could do in principle but doesn't. That's how a constitutional monarchy works.
  • ToryJimToryJim Posts: 4,192
    AlsoLei said:

    Advised not to travel, and in pain? Is the King's condition worse than we've been being told?
    Probably, his mother’s was.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    DougSeal said:

    If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
    And people might like it so much at the next election William would stand so he could become Prime Minister.

    The royals are making a play, watch out.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    Farooq said:

    FINE I'll do it

    Labour vote before and after Farage took over Reform:

    WeThink 46 -> 45
    Savana 42 -> 46
    MoreInCommon 46 -> 46
    WhiteStone 44 -> 42
    YouGov 46 -> 41
    Techne 45 -> 44
    Survation 43 -> 43
    Redfield 46 -> 42
    FocalData 43 -> 44
    BMG 43 -> 42
    Ipsos 41 -> 43

    -1,+4,0,-2,-5,-1,0,-4,+1,-1,+2

    average -0.63.

    MOE.

    Bravo, thank you for doing this +1

  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724

    Which brings us back to Oliver Dowden as the most likely successor but barring accidents with buses, this will not happen.
    The Tories could do with standardising what they mean by Deputy PM and First Secretary of State.

    The Labour Deputy has their own mandate in the Party is makes sense as the “PM hit by bus” first reserve. However it varies a bit for the Tories. Staying recent, did they “mean” it:

    - Hesletine? Yes.
    - Hague? Yes.
    - Osborne? Yes.
    - Lidington? Maybe..
    - Green? No.
    - Raab? Well he was so we have to say yes, but…
    - Dowden? LOL
  • ajbajb Posts: 151
    Farooq said:

    Most likely to command the confidence of the Commons. Since there are no MPs there is an argument to say that he could appoint Starmer. The next time the Commons meets, that's the likely outcome.
    I don't expect that would be the choice made, but it's possible. It would be a terrible bind for the king.

    I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election.
    That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    Scott_xP said:

    @OpiniumResearch
    🚨 Our latest polling with
    @ObserverUK


    The Labour lead is now 18 points
    · Labour 42% (-3)
    · Conservatives 24% (-1)
    · Lib Dems 10% (+2)
    · SNP 3% (n/c)
    · Greens 7% (+1)
    · Reform 12% (+1)

    Fieldwork: 5 - 7 June.
    Changes from 29 - 31 May.

    The whacky adventures of zany Centrist Dad and carer Ed Davey going well.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,456
    Last two polls almost identical on the bloc votes. 59 for LLG in both, 36 and 37 for RefCon.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,641

    True indeed. The full impact of D-Daygate is not in this poll though.
    Fwiw I'd expect D-Daygate to produce no change. Rather, it's main effect is likely to be to dissuade any who have already deserted the Conservatives from going back. It has nullified any rally round the flag effect that might have boosted the Tories.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099
    Heathener said:

    Bravo, thank you for doing this +1

    Indeed so - started to do it myself but got distracted by a Provencal rosé and gave up the will. Thanks @Farooq
  • Harris_TweedHarris_Tweed Posts: 1,337
    biggles said:

    In absolute extremis, rather than your last option I reckon you’d pick a non-political but qualified Lord rather than him do it. Gus O’Donnell say. Everyone would believe he’d be a caretaker only, so he’d command the notional parliament until Starmer kissed hands, and it keeps the King clean.
    For all the reasons everyone’s said, I just don’t see him resigning immediately (until about 8am on July 5th, anyway).

    However, if he *did*, or became seriously incapacitated, my money would be on the King asking the Cabinet to nominate one of its number.

    1. In the absence of the Commons, the caretaker govt is the best he has for constitutionally/democratically-legitimate advice.
    2. The cabinet are all Privy Counsellors, who have an added layer of supra-party legit. (Though I guess he might check in with Starmer and Davey for added protection)
    3. Not an expert, but seems to me there’s a strong presumption when Royals actually have to make a decision, to favour the status quo ante.

  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    ajb said:


    I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election.
    That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
    Cabinet select someone who HMK appoints until the Tories leadership election concludes then PM resigns in favour of new leader
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    Why are we discussing Sunak standing down with a little over 3 weeks left?

    This too is utter madness. It is NOT going to happen!
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173

    Like almost every aspect of the Conservative election campaign, starting with calling the election six months early, it makes no sense. Nothing makes sense; nothing is rational.
    The early election would've made sense if the Chancellor had pulled out more rabbits (in particular bribes for the core vote) in the Spring Budget, and the election was called immediately off the back of it. Why in the name of God they ended up going for it in no man's land, not either late April/early May or the Autumn, is one for the historians to unravel.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639
    Cookie said:

    That can't be right, surely? What if Sunak got hit by a bus? Surely the monarch would in practice just appoint the least controversial choice - which would surely be a cabinet member. Hunt, probably.
    He could in principle appoint who he likes, but there are lots of things he could do in principle but doesn't. That's how a constitutional monarchy works.
    As I make clear in the 2nd para of my post I’m talking about the situation advocated by CR where Sunak quits and Cameron is appointed to help the Tory party during its election campaign. That would make the resignation and appointment a political decision.

    If Sunak were to pass away as you suggest, while it’s never been done, I think few would object to Oliver Dowden, as deputy PM, stepping in for the interim. It’s not perfect but it’s a necessity, CR’s scenario is all about helping the Tories.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724

    Indeed so - started to do it myself but got distracted by a Provencal rosé and gave up the will. Thanks @Farooq
    Oooo good shout. It’s the right sort of a day for lady petrol. Hard to pair with food mind.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    This is winnable. Fewer fireworks up front but that’s ok if they keep going steady.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099
    Foxy said:

    The whacky adventures of zany Centrist Dad and carer Ed Davey going well.
    He's going to paddleboard through the middle and waterslide to the post of LOTO isn't he?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,047
    DougSeal said:

    Constitutionally it is not a “Tory” Government. That’s a convenient shorthand based on the fact that prime ministers are appointed based on their ability to command confidence in the House of Commons. The label we attached, for convenience, to that majority in the recent Parliament was the “Conservative” or “Tory” party. At the moment the PM is in place as a result of the outcome of the last election. There is no mechanism or precedent for a party that does not (by definition) command such confidence.

    The Monarch’s role in appointing a prime minister is one of the remaining prerogative powers. The majority of those powers are exercised on his behalf by ministers, but the power to appoint prime ministers remains with the King. In the absence of any majority in the Commons, or any members of the Commons, appointing a member of one party over any other would be a nakedly political decision taken, as you accept, during an election campaign for the benefit of one party. The late Queen would never have done that and I sure as hell hope the current King wouldn’t either.

    If Sunak resigned as PM all bets are off until the election. Charles may fancy doing it himself for a few weeks.
    No, the Monarch would take the least contentious decision which would be to appoint a member of the existing administration and not create a change where no mandate existed.

    If a new HoC was elected that was different he would no longer have its confidence, so would resign, just as Sunak would have done in a month's time anyway.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    ajb said:


    I don't think this is going to happen, but theoretically Sunak could announce that he's quitting as party leader, but will stay as caretaker PM until the election.
    That satisfies the constitution, the only difficulty being how internally to the conservative party they can make clear to the king now, who it is that would have the confidence of their parliamentary party after the election (in the unlikely event that they could obtain a plurality under such circumstances). Ordinarily the 1922 committee could meet to make a rule covering the case - but does it even exist during an election, since there are no MPs?
    I am sure Labour have already wargamed and prepared material along the lines of

    "Vote Starmer you know what you're getting, vote Tory and get who knows?"

    It really is not tenable to dump a leader in favour of an unknown in mid campaign. There lies the Tory party imploding completely.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,751

    We have a seagulls nest next door but one, (we had them 3 years ago but with protecting netting they left) and a wee chick fell out of the nest onto our neighbours drive

    The poor thing is so vulnerable but as advised by the RSPB it is one of those things and the parents will protect and feed the chick, though we do have foxes at night as evidenced on our security cameras so as the RSPB said ultimately it is natural selection

    This has been going on since late morning and the parents are vicious to anyone approaching the wee creature and it is genuinely amazing to watch the parents as they protect and feed their little one

    Unfortunately it is constant noise from the parents which I expect to continue as long as the chick survives

    Just telling this story as nature continues, no matter the chaos in politics

    This is a metaphor for Sunak isn't it?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,664
    edited June 2024

    And because Lord Cameron cannot become leader of the Conservative Party, he cannot be Prime Minister.

    Oliver Dowden is deputy PM so if Rishi were to fall under a bus, it would probably be he who takes over.
    It is true that under the current party rules Cameron can't be leader. It is much more doubtful that he cannot be PM (constitutionally that is. not WRT the current election); there is a clear and long convention that he can't, strengthened a bit by the events of 1963, but there is no clear and absolute bar to it. Normally the king calls for the leader of the relevant party, but if that leader asked the king to call for Lord Backwoodsman instead then I think he would do so.

    For that to happen there would have to be some sort of emergency; that is exactly when the rules and conventions develop. (PS The king is going to cal for SKS and not Lord Emsworth.)
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639
    Heathener said:

    Why are we discussing Sunak standing down with a little over 3 weeks left?

    This too is utter madness. It is NOT going to happen!

    People argue the toss about whether or not Radiohead are good or bad. An equally, if not more, insane argument.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,085
    edited June 2024

    We have a seagulls nest next door but one, (we had them 3 years ago but with protecting netting they left) and a wee chick fell out of the nest onto our neighbours drive

    The poor thing is so vulnerable but as advised by the RSPB it is one of those things and the parents will protect and feed the chick, though we do have foxes at night as evidenced on our security cameras so as the RSPB said ultimately it is natural selection

    This has been going on since late morning and the parents are vicious to anyone approaching the wee creature and it is genuinely amazing to watch the parents as they protect and feed their little one

    Unfortunately it is constant noise from the parents which I expect to continue as long as the chick survives

    Just telling this story as nature continues, no matter the chaos in politics

    Wow. We have our fair share of them in Teignmouth.

    So, presumably this has left other chicks on the roof? Are the parents going back and forth from driveway to roof?

    As an aside, seagulls are not everyone’s favourite bird but as you know they’re protected so no one is allowed to harm them, including their nests.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432

    He's going to paddleboard through the middle and waterslide to the post of LOTO isn't he?
    He's been drumming up support...
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,169
    Welcome back TSE. Hope all is well with you sir.

    It wasn't the same without you. I mean that upstart demi-Yank Smithson Junior tried his best but he wasn't really up to the task ;)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,155
    edited June 2024
    Foxy said:

    The whacky adventures of zany Centrist Dad and carer Ed Davey going well.
    Farage should leverage his campaign on sewage to point out that we have too many people for the infrastructure to cope with.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,641
    Foxy said:

    The whacky adventures of zany Centrist Dad and carer Ed Davey going well.
    Zany centrist dad and carer and hero, we now learn thanks to whoever posted Ed Davey's railway adventures. Unfortunately Vanilla's search function is still useless.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639
    pigeon said:

    The early election would've made sense if the Chancellor had pulled out more rabbits (in particular bribes for the core vote) in the Spring Budget, and the election was called immediately off the back of it. Why in the name of God they ended up going for it in no man's land, not either late April/early May or the Autumn, is one for the historians to unravel.
    Suspect that they saw no room for Autumn tax cuts so went now to avoid that political fallout,
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099

    Cabinet select someone who HMK appoints until the Tories leadership election concludes then PM resigns in favour of new leader
    In the unlikely event of the Tories winning, whowever is selected would remain as PM until the Tory leadership election, which they'd presumably be well-placed to win.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839
    edited June 2024
    DougSeal said:

    People argue the toss about whether or not Radiohead are good or bad. An equally, if not more, insane argument.
    'Siri, show me what the banhammer looks like.'
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724

    For all the reasons everyone’s said, I just don’t see him resigning immediately (until about 8am on July 5th, anyway).

    However, if he *did*, or became seriously incapacitated, my money would be on the King asking the Cabinet to nominate one of its number.

    1. In the absence of the Commons, the caretaker govt is the best he has for constitutionally/democratically-legitimate advice.
    2. The cabinet are all Privy Counsellors, who have an added layer of supra-party legit. (Though I guess he might check in with Starmer and Davey for added protection)
    3. Not an expert, but seems to me there’s a strong presumption when Royals actually have to make a decision, to favour the status quo ante.

    You’re right about the status quo. I think it’s a case of that option being “no change” and mine being “technocrat be seen to avoid empowering a politician during an election”.

    The harm is be trying to avoid is the act of elevating Dowden being seen to change the result as people flocked to him partly as “the King’s man” (stop sniggering at the back).

    As we’ve all said - this is a thought experiment only.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432

    They are closest with Redfield and YouGov followed by Techne and WeThink
    YouGov are the friendliest generally to reform and have been all along. What Redfield and Techne have in common is they both consistently show Tories losing the over 65 to Lab by 10 points or so......
    After Disaster Day on Thursday that figure is quite plausible.

    The over 65s don't like the sound of the end of the NHS as proposed by Farage.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,525
    Farooq said:

    We are overdoing it. All this talk of zero seats for the Tories is madness. Total madness. Even the idea of the Tories slipping into third is fun as a joke but it's not going to happen.
    "Yes. But what if we could?"

    The momentum is going *against* the Tories, and they are already in this hell hole. To finish 3rd the Tories would have to utterly haemorrhage votes in all directions. And they are. And have RefUK radically disrupt their vote. Which shows plenty signs of happening.

    Think of it. Tactical voting to 1997 levels. A punishment beating to end all punishment beatings. Combined with RefUK taking a critical chunk of their vote - just enough votes in just enough seats to hand another score or two over to opposition parties. As Brexit Party candidates did in 2019.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,892
    edited June 2024
    Heathener said:

    Why are we discussing Sunak standing down with a little over 3 weeks left?

    This too is utter madness. It is NOT going to happen!

    Perhaps the outcome will be 80-100 Tory seats, and Farage and possibly a couple of others elected and chipping away at the Tory core vote over a period of time.

    Certainly possible.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,056
    Foxy said:

    After Disaster Day on Thursday that figure is quite plausible.

    The over 65s don't like the sound of the end of the NHS as proposed by Farage.
    They are too distracted and distasteful of the government to notice.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,786
    Heathener said:

    Wow. We have our fair share of them in Teignmouth.

    So, presumably this has left other chicks on the roof? Are the parents going back and forth from driveway to roof?

    As an aside, seagulls are not everyone’s favourite bird but as you know they’re protected so no one is allowed to harm them, including their nests.
    Yes they are feeding both

    It is not only seagulls who are protected, all nesting birds are and it is a very serious offence to disturb birds creating their nests, removing the nest, or damaging or removing birds eggs

    Generally you cannot remove a seagull's or pigeon's nest between the 1st March and 31st October
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,786
    DavidL said:

    This is a metaphor for Sunak isn't it?
    Pity then his parents didn't look after him

    But more seriously his idiotic advisers
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    biggles said:

    You’re right about the status quo. I think it’s a case of that option being “no change” and mine being “technocrat be seen to avoid empowering a politician during an election”.

    The harm is be trying to avoid is the act of elevating Dowden being seen to change the result as people flocked to him partly as “the King’s man” (stop sniggering at the back).

    As we’ve all said - this is a thought experiment only.
    Alternatively the King could make the Speaker acting PM pending the election.

    It's crazy talk though, even the Tories are not stupid enough to have a leadership contest dominate the rest of the campaign.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639

    No, the Monarch would take the least contentious decision which would be to appoint a member of the existing administration and not create a change where no mandate existed.

    If a new HoC was elected that was different he would no longer have its confidence, so would resign, just as Sunak would have done in a month's time anyway.
    No way. The King appointing a PM nominated to help the Tories win votes DURING an election campaign? Least contentious? That’s as contentious as it comes, it could kill the both Tory Party and the Monarchy as institutions.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639
    ydoethur said:

    'Siri, show me what the banhammer looks like.'
    I deliberately didn’t express a preference. I’ve never figured out what the “right” answer is…
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,471
    ydoethur said:

    Well, that's crazy.

    If they're not vetting candidates for that seat properly, prepare for one scandal after another.

    It will be like OFSTED under Spielman on crack.
    When has OFSTED seemed as if it was under the influence of low risk drugs like crack?

    I thought they were more PCP with Crystal Meth?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839
    Well, that wasn't a bad power play for England, but it wasn't good enough if they want to win rather than just lose without doing damage to their NRR.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,664
    biggles said:

    The Tories could do with standardising what they mean by Deputy PM and First Secretary of State.

    The Labour Deputy has their own mandate in the Party is makes sense as the “PM hit by bus” first reserve. However it varies a bit for the Tories. Staying recent, did they “mean” it:

    - Hesletine? Yes.
    - Hague? Yes.
    - Osborne? Yes.
    - Lidington? Maybe..
    - Green? No.
    - Raab? Well he was so we have to say yes, but…
    - Dowden? LOL
    Perhaps the cabinet secretary and the king, and maybe Larry and whichever is the secretary who can type in number 10 and actually runs the country, know the name of the person any current PM wants to be called on if the PM's omnibus came along at the wrong moment. Maybe they also have the password for nuclear missile access written on the back of a Waitrose receipt.
  • biggles said:

    This is winnable. Fewer fireworks up front but that’s ok if they keep going steady.

    The election or the Euro football? We have won several elections in my lifetime we didn't seem like winning,and pretty consistently disappointed in the football since I was very young. But I'd think it is more likely that we will the football with a clean sheet in every game than we will win this election.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Foxy said:

    After Disaster Day on Thursday that figure is quite plausible.

    The over 65s don't like the sound of the end of the NHS as proposed by Farage.
    Techne and Redfield have been showing it since May or earlier is the point, most others have them 10 or so ahead with over 65s. Thursday isn't going to produce a 10 point ConLab swing in over 65s, it's bad, it's not pensioners rioting in the streets bad
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    kle4 said:

    They are too distracted and distasteful of the government to notice.
    I do wish we lived in a country where it was at least possible to debate different healthcare models.

    I happen to favour a single, centrally run, state controlled monolith funded by taxation (I.e. fold up all the Trusts etc.); but I should have to defend that view and various European insurance based models do work (I think they work better, when they do work better, only because more cash is spent, and my model would spend it most efficiently and equally).

    But we are children so we never discuss it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,751
    As I said England 20 odd runs behind at the end of the powerplay. But no wickets down, not completely lost.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,184
    Scott_xP said:

    @OpiniumResearch
    🚨 Our latest polling with
    @ObserverUK


    The Labour lead is now 18 points
    · Labour 42% (-3)
    · Conservatives 24% (-1)
    · Lib Dems 10% (+2)
    · SNP 3% (n/c)
    · Greens 7% (+1)
    · Reform 12% (+1)

    Fieldwork: 5 - 7 June.
    Changes from 29 - 31 May.


    Broken, sleazy Labour and Tories on the slide!
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,169
    Heathener said:

    And what a fantastic country it is in which to live or dwell.

    Amongst the happiest people on earth, in the top two (the other being Finland)
    Haviung worked there for 15 years I find some of the pointless authoritarianism rather trying. The massive restrictions on alcohol sales and the petty social planning restrictions which make our planning system look like a model of enlightenment and tolerence are symptomatic of the 'Janteloven' attitude.

    It would be fair to say that these are, on balance, outweighed by the positives of the country but it is the fact that so many unecessary restrictions are put on people that is wearing.

    Also, for countries that are the 'happiest on earth' they also have worryingly high suicide rates. Much higher than the UK for example.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    edited June 2024
    DougSeal said:

    I deliberately didn’t express a preference. I’ve never figured out what the “right” answer is…
    I have strong views…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbff8T-IpPc
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724

    The election or the Euro football? We have won several elections in my lifetime we didn't seem like winning,and pretty consistently disappointed in the football since I was very young. But I'd think it is more likely that we will the football with a clean sheet in every game than we will win this election.
    The thing that matters. The T20 World Cup game against the Aussies.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,968
    edited June 2024
    DavidL said:

    As I said England 20 odd runs behind at the end of the powerplay. But no wickets down, not completely lost.

    The England side blasts deep. This could be an interesting finish, stern test for Aussie death bowling.

    Around 30 could come off the last two overs, which means England just going at 10s for next 10.

    I have England favourites from here.
  • AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,505

    In the unlikely event of the Tories winning, whowever is selected would remain as PM until the Tory leadership election, which they'd presumably be well-placed to win.
    Yes, so the constitutional principle of making the most conservative choice in an emergency would therefore demand selection of someone who wouldn't stand in the subsequent leadership election.

    Unfortunately for HMK, that still leaves Cameron, Dowden, or Hunt as potential choices.

    For me, Dowden would be the best pick - Deputy PM (albeit purely a political title), likely to retain his seat in the election, very unlikely to stand in any leadership contest.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,641
    algarkirk said:

    It is true that under the current party rules Cameron can't be leader. It is much more doubtful that he cannot be PM (constitutionally that is. not WRT the current election); there is a clear and long convention that he can't, strengthened a bit by the events of 1963, but there is no clear and absolute bar to it. Normally the king calls for the leader of the relevant party, but if that leader asked the king to call for Lord Backwoodsman instead then I think he would do so.

    For that to happen there would have to be some sort of emergency; that is exactly when the rules and conventions develop. (PS The king is going to cal for SKS and not Lord Emsworth.)
    The government continues; ministers continue to draw their stipend; the King would not call for SKS before the election but for Oliver Dowden. Or if Rishi were only injured by the bus, he would remain PM. There is no imaginable mechanism for David Cameron to take over.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639


    Broken, sleazy Labour and Tories on the slide!
    Looks like a Labour to Lib Dem and Green and Tory to Reform swing. The figures are too neat for another explanation.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,999
    pigeon said:

    The fact that the King did what was required of him, when he actually had a reasonable excuse to leave it to the Prince of Wales, is not much remarked upon but only serves to make cut-and-run Rishi look even worse.

    Not so much a matter of what were they thinking, but were they actually thinking at all?
    And yet...if the King really is much more poorly than is admitted, it may be that Sunak - taken into confidence of this - decided the election needed to be got out the way sooner rather than later.

    It is certainly possible.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,525
    Heathener said:

    Why are we discussing Sunak standing down with a little over 3 weeks left?

    This too is utter madness. It is NOT going to happen!

    I have just responded to Farooq saying "not going to happen" by talking up a scenario where it already is. In this scenario, I seek clarification as to what Sunak is resigning from.

    Sunak is not an MP - cannot resign from that. Sunak is Prime Minister - appointed by the King - and party leader - appointed by Mrs Brady.

    So, which of the remaining two is he resigning from? PM? Can't - we have to have a government, and I think the King and the establishment will simply refuse to accept his resignation in this circumstance.

    Which leaves resigning as party leader. That would not affect him being PM. And allows the party to select someone else and that someone else could be invited to serve as PM. Though in reality would Sunak - who does not need to command a majority - not just stay as caretaker PM?

    So he *could* resign the leadership. In shame. But as the party would surely largely disappear at the election what would it matter who was selected?

    Which is why it won't happen.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,999
    DougSeal said:

    Looks like a Labour to Lib Dem and Green and Tory to Reform swing. The figures are too neat for another explanation.
    Green to Reform???
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173

    "Yes. But what if we could?"

    The momentum is going *against* the Tories, and they are already in this hell hole. To finish 3rd the Tories would have to utterly haemorrhage votes in all directions. And they are. And have RefUK radically disrupt their vote. Which shows plenty signs of happening.

    Think of it. Tactical voting to 1997 levels. A punishment beating to end all punishment beatings. Combined with RefUK taking a critical chunk of their vote - just enough votes in just enough seats to hand another score or two over to opposition parties. As Brexit Party candidates did in 2019.
    There is an unlikely but plausible scenario in which Ed Davey ends up as LOTO with a tenth of the popular vote.

    But most likely the Tories hold on to enough of their core vote to remain viable. As always, FPTP imposes a ceiling on the support for challenger parties, because of the wasted vote problem. We still have to assume that a lot of the Reform support will trudge back because they haven't the concentration of support to stand a chance of actually winning in all, or very nearly all, constituencies.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,898
    DougSeal said:

    No way. The King appointing a PM nominated to help the Tories win votes DURING an election campaign? Least contentious? That’s as contentious as it comes, it could kill the both Tory Party and the Monarchy as institutions.
    If it won votes then by definition it has some degree of legitimacy
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839

    I have just responded to Farooq saying "not going to happen" by talking up a scenario where it already is. In this scenario, I seek clarification as to what Sunak is resigning from.

    Sunak is not an MP - cannot resign from that. Sunak is Prime Minister - appointed by the King - and party leader - appointed by Mrs Brady.

    So, which of the remaining two is he resigning from? PM? Can't - we have to have a government, and I think the King and the establishment will simply refuse to accept his resignation in this circumstance.

    Which leaves resigning as party leader. That would not affect him being PM. And allows the party to select someone else and that someone else could be invited to serve as PM. Though in reality would Sunak - who does not need to command a majority - not just stay as caretaker PM?

    So he *could* resign the leadership. In shame. But as the party would surely largely disappear at the election what would it matter who was selected?

    Which is why it won't happen.
    Who would he send his resignation to? No 1922 Committee at the moment, so no Chairman of it.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,737
    biggles said:

    I started reading the sentence assuming it would end with “years”, and was already to say “blimey that was quick”. And then it was “days”… Madness.
    The article does not say sentenced (at least now), it says remanded in custody:

    COPENHAGEN, June 8 (Reuters) - A 39-year old Polish man was remanded in custody for 12 days on Saturday over an assault the previous day on Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, which authorities said caused her to suffer a minor neck injury.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,639

    Green to Reform???
    I apologise for the unforgivable lack of punctuation in that post. Commas are our friends, people. Use them!
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    DougSeal said:

    Looks like a Labour to Lib Dem and Green and Tory to Reform swing. The figures are too neat for another explanation.
    Dk to Reform snacking on the others and some churn
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 22,100
    So Farage is a damp squib, that’s what the polls seem to say. Someone needs to kick Sunak out of his depression.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,839
    Zampa all over England like a cheap suit here.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,724
    They need to take a risk here. Can’t afford to consolidate like this.
This discussion has been closed.