Why do some right wing Tory MPs want to overturn a democratic vote? – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
Romsey doesn't look right either. A clear second place for LD in 2019.Heathener said:
From the MORI-IPSOS MRP on Newton AbbotHeathener said:
Can I ask you please to be searingly honest? Are you a LibDem voter? Your “nothing […] in any manner” makes me less, not more, likely to believe you. It’s overdone.Pro_Rata said:
There is nothing about Newton Abbot that says Labour to me in any manner for a tactical vote. Lib Dem all the way.Heathener said:
Actually that’s a really good point as well. Some of the undecideds may be Tactical Voters?Foxy said:
I am showing up in the polls (not this one) as undecided, but will definitely vote. I don't think I am the only one on this board.ydoethur said:I would have thought the most likely outcome for a big chunk of that 43% is not voting at all. If they've got so far and are still uncertain...
My Newton Abbot constituency is conflicted!
Best for Britain tell me to vote Labour: https://www.getvoting.org/constituency/E14001381
Tactical.vote tell me to vote LibDem:
https://tactical.vote/newton-abbot/
and
TacticalVote.co.uk haven’t yet made up their mind!
https://tacticalvote.co.uk/#NewtonAbbot
So whereas I thought I might have to vote LibDem, I’m no longer sure!
Tactical.Vote didn’t even think about it, seemingly. They put LibDem from the word go.
Best for Britain took 3 weeks to weigh it up, carefully, and concluded that I should vote Labour.
@Pro_Rata this is exactly what I was saying earlier. Newton Abbot is leaning Conservative but with Labour, not the LibDems, in second
2 -
I think I broadly agree with that analysis.Fishing said:I've been in California for the last couple of weeks. I've been trying to get a sense on the ground of where the Presidential election is heading, and from my entirely unscientific sample of friends and acquaintances in this completely atypical state, I am leaning Trump. Of course the usual caveat is that people don't start to focus on politics till after Labor Day in September, but with that out of the way, my main reasons for thinking so are:
- the economy. People feel the inflation here every time they go to the store. And they complain about it constantly and spontaneously, unlike most political issues. Biden has got all the blame for that, partially undeservedly, but that's politics. His misnamed and misdirected Inflation Reduction Act convinced absolutely nobody.
- Israel/Palestine. As so often with his foreign policy, Biden has picked an unhappy middle course, doing enough to obstruct Israel to annoy its supporters while not helping the Palestinians nearly enough to appease theirs.
- Biden's age. Spontaneously people are mentioning how he is deteriorating more and more. He is even more the butt of jokes than when I was here last time, which is not where a politician wants to be.
- Trump. The 34 guilty verdicts are in a case no-one really cares about, and have angered only Trump's opponents. As none of the other cases look likely to go to trial before the election, and as any sentence in New York will be appealed until well into next year, I don't think the NY DA's indictment has done anything besides give Trump masses of free publicity to energise his supporters. It's completely bizarre and counterintuitive but there we are.
Some dogs that haven't barked in my political discussions with friends: the border, Ukraine, the strength of the economy, China.
Inflation is a killer everywhere in the developed world, and incumbent governments are getting the blame.
You are also absolutely correct re Israel: basically, Biden won both the Jewish and the Arab/Muslim votes back in 2020, and he was always going to upset at least one of them.
The one big question, though, is whether both candidates make it through the next five months without a major health issue. And, of course, the margins are very tight, so it could go either way.0 -
Could happen in a lot of places. At by-elections the public seems pretty able to get a sense of the most effective tactical vote, but in the midst of a landslide switch to Labour perhaps that will not work out great in some potential LD targets.Heathener said:
From the MORI-IPSOS MRP on Newton AbbotHeathener said:
Can I ask you please to be searingly honest? Are you a LibDem voter? Your “nothing […] in any manner” makes me less, not more, likely to believe you. It’s overdone.Pro_Rata said:
There is nothing about Newton Abbot that says Labour to me in any manner for a tactical vote. Lib Dem all the way.Heathener said:
Actually that’s a really good point as well. Some of the undecideds may be Tactical Voters?Foxy said:
I am showing up in the polls (not this one) as undecided, but will definitely vote. I don't think I am the only one on this board.ydoethur said:I would have thought the most likely outcome for a big chunk of that 43% is not voting at all. If they've got so far and are still uncertain...
My Newton Abbot constituency is conflicted!
Best for Britain tell me to vote Labour: https://www.getvoting.org/constituency/E14001381
Tactical.vote tell me to vote LibDem:
https://tactical.vote/newton-abbot/
and
TacticalVote.co.uk haven’t yet made up their mind!
https://tacticalvote.co.uk/#NewtonAbbot
So whereas I thought I might have to vote LibDem, I’m no longer sure!
Tactical.Vote didn’t even think about it, seemingly. They put LibDem from the word go.
Best for Britain took 3 weeks to weigh it up, carefully, and concluded that I should vote Labour.
@Pro_Rata this is exactly what I was saying earlier. Newton Abbot is leaning Conservative but with Labour, not the LibDems, in second1 -
“Conspicuous by [my] absence” according to one seasoned poster on here.Leon said:
Why is a world traveller, thermos-hot-water-hoarder, transgender expert, well known TV pundit, hardworking postwoman, friend of Misha Hussein, spa day goer, single mother, Devonshire farmer, AWARD WINNING WRITER, and close friend of Surrey Tories WHO ALSO ACTUALLY HAS A LIFE ACTUALLY - spending so much time on a minor political forum?Heathener said:
Another subtlety lost on @Leon. He’s just a MAGAloon I’m afraid and loves trying to whip up reaction on here.PedestrianRock said:
Just read that thread. Most of it read linked “Labour have said they will do X…but what if they do Y? That would be terrifying”Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
Not saying they will stick to the manifesto at all but there wasn’t much in there which seemed credibly scary.
Why is a so-called successful writer spending so much of his life on a minor political forum? It doesn’t stack up ...
I absented myself for two months earlier in the year and shall do so again after the election. But the campaign is fun and, to me, interesting. Quite why you spend all your life on here when you claim still to be successful is baffling unless of course it’s a lie and you are a saddo.
Though the idea that I have been or am a postie or farmer is very appealing but sadly untrue.
p.s. Mishal is not called Misha - thicko0 -
It's plausible assuming accurate polling, which is plausible enough.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Is 253 majority the highest in history?
Still seems implausible to me1 -
It ends up frothing at the mouth about Labour's commitment to LGBT equality.Farooq said:
Collingwood and Pilkington have been predicting financial meltdown for years. LIGHTS FLASHING RED ON THE DASHBOARD!!!1!! every month. Chicken Little fare to panic people like you.Leon said:
His central thesis is that Labour are fucked economically, and stuck with few choices - which is true - so they will have to raise taxes just to stand still (this is not their fault, of course, they are inheriting a fiscal nightmare)PedestrianRock said:
Just read that thread. Most of it read linked “Labour have said they will do X…but what if they do Y? That would be terrifying”Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
Not saying they will stick to the manifesto at all but there wasn’t much in there which seemed credibly scary.
They won't be able to throw money at public services, so in the absence of that they will do loads of Woke things to keep activists and MPs happy, they won't tackle immigration, or the boat people, they will follow Scotland and Wales on education and health (God help us), they will follow Scotland on Trans, they will do awful, damaging things
Hence, I believe, a brutal backlash in five years when desperate voters reach for the hard right, not just the right
If Skyr Toolmakersson can prove me wrong, I will buy him - or me - a bottle of Brennivin by way of relief and celebration
I don't think many people feel threatened by that, in this day and age. Even the Tory party leadership seems to have decided transphobia isn't much of a vote-winner.
1 -
To add to which, most people who come here illegally do so by showing their passport to the nice man at the airport and simply not returning home again. (Ditto, of course, in the US.)Richard_Tyndall said:
As I said during a discussion on here last week 96.4% of the immigration into this country is legal and sanctioned/encouraged by the Government. Focusing on the 3ish % that come over by small boats is just another in a long line of Tory deceptions.TimS said:A very useful graphic showing why the focus on small boats is an obfuscatory red herring, whether you're for or against large scale immigration:
https://x.com/EdConwaySky/status/18031083176417448191 -
We've been over this a trillion times. PB is fun. I've learned a lot on here, EVEN FROM PEOPLE NOT ON THE LISTHeathener said:
“Conspicuous by [my] absence” according to one seasoned poster on here.Leon said:
Why is a world traveller, thermos-hot-water-hoarder, transgender expert, well known TV pundit, hardworking postwoman, friend of Misha Hussein, spa day goer, single mother, Devonshire farmer, AWARD WINNING WRITER, and close friend of Surrey Tories WHO ALSO ACTUALLY HAS A LIFE ACTUALLY - spending so much time on a minor political forum?Heathener said:
Another subtlety lost on @Leon. He’s just a MAGAloon I’m afraid and loves trying to whip up reaction on here.PedestrianRock said:
Just read that thread. Most of it read linked “Labour have said they will do X…but what if they do Y? That would be terrifying”Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
Not saying they will stick to the manifesto at all but there wasn’t much in there which seemed credibly scary.
Why is a so-called successful writer spending so much of his life on a minor political forum? It doesn’t stack up ...
I absented myself for two months earlier in the year and shall do so again after the election. But the campaign is fun and, to me, interesting. Quite why you spend all your life on here when you claim still to be successful is baffling unless of course it’s a lie and you are a saddo.
Though the idea that I have been or am a postie or farmer is very appealing but sadly untrue.
p.s. Mishal is not called Misha - thicko
Also, it serves as a pub when I am in foreign parts, which I am constantly, as it is my job
Anyway enough bickering. I agree with you that this is a fascinating election and I actually welcome your analysis thereof. You may be "eccentric" in many other ways but you strike me as an astute observer of detailed political trends, at a time like now. Please carry on!1 -
London far too bullish on Labour in the MRP I think, Reform being overcooked there ans in Scotland for me, but an interesting collection. Norfolk looks fun0
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_United_Kingdom_general_electionBatteryCorrectHorse said:Is 253 majority the highest in history?
Still seems implausible to me
1 -
Betting tip: you can't move but for yellow diamonds in Kingston/Surbiton. You wouldn't know any other party existed from leafletting and advertising.
There is £10 available at 1.01 on Betfair for those tempted.
1 -
First forecast map for election day now that it’s within 384 hours. And it’s…mixed.
But so far out as to be meaningless at this stage. Overall pattern is decent.
0 -
No.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Is 253 majority the highest in history?
Still seems implausible to me
1931 for starters.0 -
This is, I think, the first match you can't take your eyes off2
-
I notice the IPSOS MRP has Reform winning 61% in Ashfield, with 0 mention of the Ashfield Independents.
Why don’t they insert the Ashfield Independents in and try and predict the rest of the vote shares in Ashfield accordingly? Instead of just saying “well they’re not standing nationally so we’ll just ignore that for our MRP” ?0 -
Waveney Valley and Bristol Central go to the Greens, but they lose Brighton Pavilion.
Farage wins Clacton easily with 53%.0 -
Can't see what the majority was?rcs1000 said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_United_Kingdom_general_electionBatteryCorrectHorse said:Is 253 majority the highest in history?
Still seems implausible to me0 -
Surely the Tripe Election of 2020 also wins biggest.TheScreamingEagles said:
No.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Is 253 majority the highest in history?
Still seems implausible to me
1931 for starters.0 -
FAKE NEWS - there are no nice men at any airport.rcs1000 said:
To add to which, most people who come here illegally do so by showing their passport to the nice man at the airport and simply not returning home again. (Ditto, of course, in the US.)Richard_Tyndall said:
As I said during a discussion on here last week 96.4% of the immigration into this country is legal and sanctioned/encouraged by the Government. Focusing on the 3ish % that come over by small boats is just another in a long line of Tory deceptions.TimS said:A very useful graphic showing why the focus on small boats is an obfuscatory red herring, whether you're for or against large scale immigration:
https://x.com/EdConwaySky/status/18031083176417448190 -
You know, I mostly think Cameron is a bit of a cock, but he was absolutely right regarding social media.TheScreamingEagles said:Ooh.
STATEMENT REGARDING JOEY BARTON:
The news of Joey Barton’s apology and commitment to pay damages and costs is not the final outcome of this case.
After five defamatory tweets, my lawyer offered Barton a chance to settle: pay £75k, plus my costs, and make an apology.
He ignored that offer and posted more disgusting tweets about me, even publishing my home address to his followers.
When I then took my case to the High Court, a judge ruled that TEN of the tweets I complained of were defamatory. Having lost, Barton has returned to the offer we made after tweet 5.
There has therefore been a parallel action on tweets 6-10 and Barton will pay further damages for these. A number of other steps — including statements made in Court by way of apology — are still to be taken, and Barton has agreed to pay my legal costs of all of the claims.
Jeremy Vine
https://x.com/theJeremyVine/status/18031000484036650353 -
You clearly missed the bit where argy-bargy about Trans rights toppled a Scottish first ministerChris said:
It ends up frothing at the mouth about Labour's commitment to LGBT equality.Farooq said:
Collingwood and Pilkington have been predicting financial meltdown for years. LIGHTS FLASHING RED ON THE DASHBOARD!!!1!! every month. Chicken Little fare to panic people like you.Leon said:
His central thesis is that Labour are fucked economically, and stuck with few choices - which is true - so they will have to raise taxes just to stand still (this is not their fault, of course, they are inheriting a fiscal nightmare)PedestrianRock said:
Just read that thread. Most of it read linked “Labour have said they will do X…but what if they do Y? That would be terrifying”Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
Not saying they will stick to the manifesto at all but there wasn’t much in there which seemed credibly scary.
They won't be able to throw money at public services, so in the absence of that they will do loads of Woke things to keep activists and MPs happy, they won't tackle immigration, or the boat people, they will follow Scotland and Wales on education and health (God help us), they will follow Scotland on Trans, they will do awful, damaging things
Hence, I believe, a brutal backlash in five years when desperate voters reach for the hard right, not just the right
If Skyr Toolmakersson can prove me wrong, I will buy him - or me - a bottle of Brennivin by way of relief and celebration
I don't think many people feel threatened by that, in this day and age. Even the Tory party leadership seems to have decided transphobia isn't much of a vote-winner.0 -
Given his dominance, even when not PM, I'm surprised Baldwin doesn't come up more.rcs1000 said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1931_United_Kingdom_general_electionBatteryCorrectHorse said:Is 253 majority the highest in history?
Still seems implausible to me0 -
As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.Leon said:
But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recentlyGIN1138 said:
A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
And he makes that point
Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.0 -
Guardian article: “IPSOS poll has Corbyn losing Islington North”
IPSOS MRP: no mention of Corbyn / Independents % in Islington North seat. But the article says ‘Corbyn will lose’.
Why don’t they give us this info? I appreciate it’s hard to get for individual constituencies. But it makes me question the wider methodology?0 -
Based on 100% of the last one elections, the LibDem leader has lost their seat every time.Ratters said:Betting tip: you can't move but for yellow diamonds in Kingston/Surbiton. You wouldn't know any other party existed from leafletting and advertising.
There is £10 available at 1.01 on Betfair for those tempted.
So I would have hoped that your prediction that Ed Davey will hold Kingston and Surbiton would offer us rather more enticing odds than ... errr ... 1% over three weeks.0 -
Oh wow1
-
Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.rcs1000 said:On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.
The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.
And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.
I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.
No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.
The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.
This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.
And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.1 -
The Turks are singing for Jeremy Corbyn again ;-)0
-
You can't trust a word SKS says.TheScreamingEagles said:Ugh.
Sir Keir Starmer has opened the door to tax rises for millions of Britons by defining a working person as someone who relies on public services and doesn’t have savings.
The Labour leader has repeatedly ruled out putting up taxes on what he calls “working people” who he says have borne the brunt of the cost of living crisis.
Asked what he meant by the term, he said it refers to “people who earn their living, rely on our services and don’t really have the ability to write a cheque when they get into trouble”.
His definition means millions of Britons including pensioners, savers, and those who use private services like healthcare may not be covered by his tax rise pledge.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/18/starmer-leaves-door-open-to-tax-rises-for-millions/0 -
Don't vote for him.FrancisUrquhart said:
Every once in a while the mask slips and I don't really like what I see. Its certainly not something Blair or Mandelson said or thought.TheScreamingEagles said:Ugh.
Sir Keir Starmer has opened the door to tax rises for millions of Britons by defining a working person as someone who relies on public services and doesn’t have savings.
The Labour leader has repeatedly ruled out putting up taxes on what he calls “working people” who he says have borne the brunt of the cost of living crisis.
Asked what he meant by the term, he said it refers to “people who earn their living, rely on our services and don’t really have the ability to write a cheque when they get into trouble”.
His definition means millions of Britons including pensioners, savers, and those who use private services like healthcare may not be covered by his tax rise pledge.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/18/starmer-leaves-door-open-to-tax-rises-for-millions/1 -
Bloody hell that was a GOAL!!!! That’s two worldies by the Turks
These Euros are already stacks better than the ICC cricket world cup, and I like cricket.1 -
When there's a wave such as this personal votes matter little.Andy_JS said:
MRP doesn't take account of personal votes, right? Stand corrected if it does.Heathener said:I’m surprised at that MRP on Jeremy Hunt. It doesn’t tally with what I’ve heard on the local grapevine, but who knows?
He’s not the worst of the Conservatives and he has some personal support in these parts.
Look at Basstlelaw in 2019 for example1 -
Wasn't that. Was his approach to Green (proper Green) issues and the resulting argument with the SGs.Leon said:
You clearly missed the bit where argy-bargy about Trans rights toppled a Scottish first ministerChris said:
It ends up frothing at the mouth about Labour's commitment to LGBT equality.Farooq said:
Collingwood and Pilkington have been predicting financial meltdown for years. LIGHTS FLASHING RED ON THE DASHBOARD!!!1!! every month. Chicken Little fare to panic people like you.Leon said:
His central thesis is that Labour are fucked economically, and stuck with few choices - which is true - so they will have to raise taxes just to stand still (this is not their fault, of course, they are inheriting a fiscal nightmare)PedestrianRock said:
Just read that thread. Most of it read linked “Labour have said they will do X…but what if they do Y? That would be terrifying”Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
Not saying they will stick to the manifesto at all but there wasn’t much in there which seemed credibly scary.
They won't be able to throw money at public services, so in the absence of that they will do loads of Woke things to keep activists and MPs happy, they won't tackle immigration, or the boat people, they will follow Scotland and Wales on education and health (God help us), they will follow Scotland on Trans, they will do awful, damaging things
Hence, I believe, a brutal backlash in five years when desperate voters reach for the hard right, not just the right
If Skyr Toolmakersson can prove me wrong, I will buy him - or me - a bottle of Brennivin by way of relief and celebration
I don't think many people feel threatened by that, in this day and age. Even the Tory party leadership seems to have decided transphobia isn't much of a vote-winner.0 -
Exactly rightMisterBedfordshire said:
As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.Leon said:
But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recentlyGIN1138 said:
A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
And he makes that point
Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz
For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion
OMG Georgia!!!0 -
Evening all
Well, okay - IPSOS hands the Conservatives a bone of sort. Still facing a historic defeat but remining the second largest party both in terms of votes and seats.
The data is old and as with other MRP "estimations" may not fully take into account what's happening on the ground.
We now have considerbale variability re-appearing with the gap between Conservative and Reform ranging from zero to twelve points.0 -
Ipsos haven't modelled the minor parties and indies at all. Galloway nowhere, Yakoob nowhere etc so that needs to be factored in here2
-
I gather that while utilities have not gone up nearly as much as in the UK food prices in both shops and takeaways/restaurants have gone up by eyewatering amounts.rcs1000 said:
I think I broadly agree with that analysis.Fishing said:I've been in California for the last couple of weeks. I've been trying to get a sense on the ground of where the Presidential election is heading, and from my entirely unscientific sample of friends and acquaintances in this completely atypical state, I am leaning Trump. Of course the usual caveat is that people don't start to focus on politics till after Labor Day in September, but with that out of the way, my main reasons for thinking so are:
- the economy. People feel the inflation here every time they go to the store. And they complain about it constantly and spontaneously, unlike most political issues. Biden has got all the blame for that, partially undeservedly, but that's politics. His misnamed and misdirected Inflation Reduction Act convinced absolutely nobody.
- Israel/Palestine. As so often with his foreign policy, Biden has picked an unhappy middle course, doing enough to obstruct Israel to annoy its supporters while not helping the Palestinians nearly enough to appease theirs.
- Biden's age. Spontaneously people are mentioning how he is deteriorating more and more. He is even more the butt of jokes than when I was here last time, which is not where a politician wants to be.
- Trump. The 34 guilty verdicts are in a case no-one really cares about, and have angered only Trump's opponents. As none of the other cases look likely to go to trial before the election, and as any sentence in New York will be appealed until well into next year, I don't think the NY DA's indictment has done anything besides give Trump masses of free publicity to energise his supporters. It's completely bizarre and counterintuitive but there we are.
Some dogs that haven't barked in my political discussions with friends: the border, Ukraine, the strength of the economy, China.
Inflation is a killer everywhere in the developed world, and incumbent governments are getting the blame.
You are also absolutely correct re Israel: basically, Biden won both the Jewish and the Arab/Muslim votes back in 2020, and he was always going to upset at least one of them.
The one big question, though, is whether both candidates make it through the next five months without a major health issue. And, of course, the margins are very tight, so it could go either way.0 -
MRP doesn't take personal votes into consideration as far as I know, so it's a bit naughty of them to talk about Corbyn losing his seat as if it does.PedestrianRock said:Guardian article: “IPSOS poll has Corbyn losing Islington North”
IPSOS MRP: no mention of Corbyn / Independents % in Islington North seat. But the article says ‘Corbyn will lose’.
Why don’t they give us this info? I appreciate it’s hard to get for individual constituencies. But it makes me question the wider methodology?2 -
Does anyone remember that chap who stood for the Tories as leader for literally a day and then pulled out0
-
Re: that Ipsos MRP. I note they have Epsom and Ewell going to the Lib Dems, which was tipped here by Casino I think and I got on when it was 14/1, two and a half weeks ago.
That will be a nice little earner if it comes in. Best odds you can get now are 2/1.2 -
Looks as if IPSOS MRP takes no account of Corbyn at all.
IPSOS Islington North:
Lab 55
Green 11
Reform 9
Con 6
LD 6
So meaningless as a predictor of Corbyn's chances?2 -
Less Betfair's 5% commission charges on winnings of course!rcs1000 said:
Based on 100% of the last one elections, the LibDem leader has lost their seat every time.Ratters said:Betting tip: you can't move but for yellow diamonds in Kingston/Surbiton. You wouldn't know any other party existed from leafletting and advertising.
There is £10 available at 1.01 on Betfair for those tempted.
So I would have hoped that your prediction that Ed Davey will hold Kingston and Surbiton would offer us rather more enticing odds than ... errr ... 1% over three weeks.0 -
Sorry I mean Bolsover.Nunu5 said:
When there's a wave such as this personal votes matter little.Andy_JS said:
MRP doesn't take account of personal votes, right? Stand corrected if it does.Heathener said:I’m surprised at that MRP on Jeremy Hunt. It doesn’t tally with what I’ve heard on the local grapevine, but who knows?
He’s not the worst of the Conservatives and he has some personal support in these parts.
Look at Basstlelaw in 2019 for example0 -
And that is just the 40% tip.MisterBedfordshire said:
I gather that while utilities have not gone up nearly as much as in the UK food prices in both shops and takeaways/restaurants have gone up by eyewatering amounts.rcs1000 said:
I think I broadly agree with that analysis.Fishing said:I've been in California for the last couple of weeks. I've been trying to get a sense on the ground of where the Presidential election is heading, and from my entirely unscientific sample of friends and acquaintances in this completely atypical state, I am leaning Trump. Of course the usual caveat is that people don't start to focus on politics till after Labor Day in September, but with that out of the way, my main reasons for thinking so are:
- the economy. People feel the inflation here every time they go to the store. And they complain about it constantly and spontaneously, unlike most political issues. Biden has got all the blame for that, partially undeservedly, but that's politics. His misnamed and misdirected Inflation Reduction Act convinced absolutely nobody.
- Israel/Palestine. As so often with his foreign policy, Biden has picked an unhappy middle course, doing enough to obstruct Israel to annoy its supporters while not helping the Palestinians nearly enough to appease theirs.
- Biden's age. Spontaneously people are mentioning how he is deteriorating more and more. He is even more the butt of jokes than when I was here last time, which is not where a politician wants to be.
- Trump. The 34 guilty verdicts are in a case no-one really cares about, and have angered only Trump's opponents. As none of the other cases look likely to go to trial before the election, and as any sentence in New York will be appealed until well into next year, I don't think the NY DA's indictment has done anything besides give Trump masses of free publicity to energise his supporters. It's completely bizarre and counterintuitive but there we are.
Some dogs that haven't barked in my political discussions with friends: the border, Ukraine, the strength of the economy, China.
Inflation is a killer everywhere in the developed world, and incumbent governments are getting the blame.
You are also absolutely correct re Israel: basically, Biden won both the Jewish and the Arab/Muslim votes back in 2020, and he was always going to upset at least one of them.
The one big question, though, is whether both candidates make it through the next five months without a major health issue. And, of course, the margins are very tight, so it could go either way.0 -
Oh dear.BatteryCorrectHorse said:
Surely the Tripe Election of 2020 also wins biggest.TheScreamingEagles said:
No.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Is 253 majority the highest in history?
Still seems implausible to me
1931 for starters.1 -
It is the main way that they can demonstrate that they are in serious contention which is critical to them attracting tactical votes in Tory seats. It frequently works for them.kle4 said:
LDs are old fashioned when it comes to posters and signs.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Just had a report in from my parents in a posh bit of East Hants. Apparently Lib Dem posters everywhere whatever that means
HUFYD's comment that Conservatives don't put up posters because they consider it "common" did bring a smile to my face!1 -
Can you give us a clue which seat this is?FeersumEnjineeya said:
Predicting that my constituency will go red for the first time ever. That will be quite something if it actually happens. The election event of a lifetime. Looking back, the last time this area was represented by someone other than a Tory was 1885.TheScreamingEagles said:Full Ipsos MRP data here
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/uk-opinion-polls/ipsos-election-mrp0 -
Waveney Valley seems like a real hodgepodge of a seat - it is made up of 5 current seats, with no single part making up more than 41% of the new seat.Andy_JS said:Waveney Valley and Bristol Central go to the Greens, but they lose Brighton Pavilion.
Farage wins Clacton easily with 53%.
Wiki says the Greens won a lot of council seats in 2023 in the area, but it doesn't seem like a Brighton or Bristol type situation where they've been pushing hard locally for ages. Interesting.0 -
Solid gold tripe TSE. Solid gold.TheScreamingEagles said:
Oh dear.BatteryCorrectHorse said:
Surely the Tripe Election of 2020 also wins biggest.TheScreamingEagles said:
No.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Is 253 majority the highest in history?
Still seems implausible to me
1931 for starters.0 -
Meanwhile, next door, Ipsos has Sutton & Cheam at 34% Con, 26% Lab, 26% LD. That seems like another implausible one to me.kyf_100 said:Re: that Ipsos MRP. I note they have Epsom and Ewell going to the Lib Dems, which was tipped here by Casino I think and I got on when it was 14/1, two and a half weeks ago.
That will be a nice little earner if it comes in. Best odds you can get now are 2/1.0 -
I keep seeing people mentioning Betfair’s 5% commission.peter_from_putney said:
Less Betfair's 5% commission charges on winnings of course!rcs1000 said:
Based on 100% of the last one elections, the LibDem leader has lost their seat every time.Ratters said:Betting tip: you can't move but for yellow diamonds in Kingston/Surbiton. You wouldn't know any other party existed from leafletting and advertising.
There is £10 available at 1.01 on Betfair for those tempted.
So I would have hoped that your prediction that Ed Davey will hold Kingston and Surbiton would offer us rather more enticing odds than ... errr ... 1% over three weeks.
If you change your account settings you can get 2% commission instead - you just lose a free bet here and some other largely worthless stuff there - definitely seems worth it for most people.
0 -
ChishtiBatteryCorrectHorse said:Does anyone remember that chap who stood for the Tories as leader for literally a day and then pulled out
0 -
Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.Luckyguy1983 said:
Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.rcs1000 said:On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.
The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.
And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.
I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.
No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.
The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.
This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.
And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.1 -
I can't read that as I don't have Twitter.Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
What are the headlines please?0 -
He's to lose his seat supposedly.wooliedyed said:
ChishtiBatteryCorrectHorse said:Does anyone remember that chap who stood for the Tories as leader for literally a day and then pulled out
1 -
I live in East Hants and I haven't seen Lib Dem posters anywhere.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Just had a report in from my parents in a posh bit of East Hants. Apparently Lib Dem posters everywhere whatever that means
0 -
Hadn’t realised that the IPSOS-MORI MRP is from data sampling 7-12 June.
I’d like to see an up-to-date YouGov MRP for comparison ideally.1 -
I'm struggling to think about how your first point relates to what I'd written, and then I got it.Luckyguy1983 said:
Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.rcs1000 said:On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.
The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.
And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.
I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.
No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.
The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.
This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.
And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
You didn't actually read what I'd written! You thought I was giving you an ode to centrism, and therefore you trotted out an argument against centrism.
But let me take your first point: Mrs Thatcher realized that well over half the country was badly negatively impacted by inflation. She was able to draw together the pensioners (who were on fixed incomes and therefore were hammered by it), small business people (who couldn't afford to borrow to grow their businesses because inflation led to sky high interest rates) and the like. She built a coalition.
Building a coalition != centrism.
Of course, what really helped her was that the Labour Party (who, by the way had accepted monetarism and had already started squeezing the money supply) had imploded and fucked up the actual execution of day-to-day government. You know, Winter of Discontent, and all that.0 -
Long time listener, first time caller etc etc.
As a public service announcement I can reveal that my postal ballot arrived today in Southampton Itchen so the election is now on.3 -
It's 25 tweets at least, I can't spam the site with all thatCasino_Royale said:
I can't read that as I don't have Twitter.Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
What are the headlines please?
You need a TwiX account, just get a burner account for the duration of the election0 -
They are pushing there hard, but I'm not sure their top end. I think it might end up Tory as the others vote out 3 ways. In a non meltdown election would be fairly safe bluekle4 said:
Waveney Valley seems like a real hodgepodge of a seat - it is made up of 5 current seats, with no single part making up more than 41% of the new seat.Andy_JS said:Waveney Valley and Bristol Central go to the Greens, but they lose Brighton Pavilion.
Farage wins Clacton easily with 53%.
Wiki says the Greens won a lot of council seats in 2023 in the area, but it doesn't seem like a Brighton or Bristol type situation where they've been pushing hard locally for ages. Interesting.0 -
https://x.com/owenwntr/status/1803116579397177578?s=46
Gillingham & Rainham voting intention (+/- 5%, changes vs 2019 notional)
LAB: 55% (+27)
CON: 23% (-39)
REF: 15% (+15)
LDEM: 5% (=)
GRN: 2% (=)
@wethinkpolling/@TheEconomist, 5th-16th June. N=376
Think the IPSOS poll might make some Tories feel safer than they should feel perhaps…1 -
Anyone with a brain knows Labour will do what left-wing governments do in office and SKS will only reveal his true colours once in office.Leon said:
His central thesis is that Labour are fucked economically, and stuck with few choices - which is true - so they will have to raise taxes just to stand still (this is not their fault, of course, they are inheriting a fiscal nightmare)PedestrianRock said:
Just read that thread. Most of it read linked “Labour have said they will do X…but what if they do Y? That would be terrifying”Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
Not saying they will stick to the manifesto at all but there wasn’t much in there which seemed credibly scary.
They won't be able to throw money at public services, so in the absence of that they will do loads of Woke things to keep activists and MPs happy, they won't tackle immigration, or the boat people, they will follow Scotland and Wales on education and health (God help us), they will follow Scotland on Trans, they will do awful, damaging things
Hence, I believe, a brutal backlash in five years when desperate voters reach for the hard right, not just the right
If Skyr Toolmakersson can prove me wrong, I will buy him - or me - a bottle of Brennivin by way of relief and celebration
You don't have to vote for it.0 -
It's been predicted for a while that she would give the Tory a run for his money even before the present catastrophes unfolded for the Tories and Farage emboldened Reform. She is a very vocal local councilor reelected with 80% of the vote and got a decent share in GE2019. i understand the LDs and Labour have been giving her an easy ride on the basis she's seen locally as the best anti Tory bet despite only being 4th place in 2019 (though it was close)El_Capitano said:This Ipsos MRP is nuts. North Herefordshire is going... Green? What the actual ****?
0 -
I'll pop some photos on later if you'd like. But to reveal where they are would reveal the location which I'd rather not do!Casino_Royale said:
I live in East Hants and I haven't seen Lib Dem posters anywhere.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Just had a report in from my parents in a posh bit of East Hants. Apparently Lib Dem posters everywhere whatever that means
0 -
The problem is that the margin of error for parties with larger vote shares can be smaller than ones with smaller vote shares but big surges or big collapses.stodge said:Evening all
Well, okay - IPSOS hands the Conservatives a bone of sort. Still facing a historic defeat but remining the second largest party both in terms of votes and seats.
The data is old and as with other MRP "estimations" may not fully take into account what's happening on the ground.
We now have considerbale variability re-appearing with the gap between Conservative and Reform ranging from zero to twelve points.
I'm reasonably confident that Labour is at 43% +/- 3% and the Lib Dems are at 11% +/- 1%
but the problem with both the Tories and Reform is that the change is so significant that the distribution of individual samples of opinions on them may not be a bell curve in this case. Even saying that though Tories should be on 21% +/- 3% and Reform on 16% +/- 3% and that could, with a little additional MoE give you both 0% and 12%0 -
And he’s wrong.Leon said:
But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recently
And he makes that point
Much of the Equality Act has been in place since the 1970s. It’s largely a consolidation of pre-existing statutes like the Equal Pay Act 1970, the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976, and the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 that were getting unwieldy.
The Equality Act can be, and has been, amended on a number of occasions. Any part of it could have been changed or repealed. Indeed, although it was passed by a Labour majority parliament, its commencement order came from a coalition minister after the election in 2010. The Tories could, therefore, have strangled it at birth and not implemented it. They could, at the very least, have repealed the one or two things that the Act did introduce, such as the public sector equality duty. In fact some Tories did propose that very thing but did the Govt did nothing.
There is a strange obsession with this Act but none of the fash actually understand it. Indeed the Reform “contract” document repeatedly refers to it as the “Equalities” Act and suggests that it legalises positive discrimination when, in fact, the opposite is true.
1 -
NEW THREAD
0 -
According to an article from Electoral Reform in 2019 at that time the average parliamentary seat had not changed hands in 42 years, with 65 not changing in over a century (11 Labour and 54 Conservative).
It can be interesting though - for example, Copeland/Whitehaven was Labour held from 1935-2017, but only once did the majority rise above 10k, what might be seen as a comfortable level.0 -
Sadly, Fair comment.Leon said:
Exactly rightMisterBedfordshire said:
As did the European Communities Act Solution to the Equality act preventing reform is same as European Communities Act & Human Rights preventing reform. Repeal or Heavily Amend it.Leon said:
But the Equality Act did exactly that, without anyone realising, until very recentlyGIN1138 said:
A lot of this talk about Labour seeking to stop any future government going in a right wing direction seems like scaremongering to me.Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
No Parliament can bind it's successor. The Tories could have thrown out most or all of the 1997-2010 reforms in the past 14 years if they'd wished but the fact is they chose not to.
And he makes that point
Tories have been torn apart because they thought Brexit was enough. It wasn't Brexit was just the enabling measure that enabled the rest to be done. They were not done and as a result reforms that the public wanted could not be enacted and they regard the Tories as having betrayed them.
I blame Boris. He had the majority to do all this, but he was too frit of his posh lefty friends, fam and neighbz
For this to change, it will take a firmly rightwing leader of a firmly rightwing party that doesn't give a tinker's wank about fashionable opinion
OMG Georgia!!!
I fear Boris had two fatal flaws (possibly 3).
1) Weakness - so he didn't have the balls to stick with essentially the same policy as Sweden and more unforgivably, didn't end the lockdown nonsense after six weeks when it was obvious that Covid was a disease of the very elderly, very ill with something else and very unlucky (he clearly thought it was nonsense as illustrated by his behaviour).
2) Needing to be liked (which let his posh lefty friends have a veto).
3) I suspect (pure spectulation) he got some policy ideas from domestic sources. That would account for his U turn on Eagle Slicers and the like, when the M'Learned former Mrs Boris was swapped for the current incumbent.0 -
I think this is spot on. And it’s not just confined to the Conservatives. I remember at peak Corbyn when centre-left Labour MPs were made to feel unwelcome and Momentum members denounced anyone who criticised Corbyn as a Tory.rcs1000 said:On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.
The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.
And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.
I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.
No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.
The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.
This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.
The purge of moderate conservatives in the Johnson era has left the party poorer and I wonder what this election woukd look like if we had Saj, Gauke, Hammond etc still in the cabinet.0 -
Tories, except landowners in farmers fields or candidates, don't really do posters.Andy_JS said:I remember posting on here that at GE2017 I only saw one Tory poster during the entire campaign, which was in a field just outside Maidenhead IIRC. Yet the Tories got 44% of the vote.
0 -
OK.Omnium said:
Every time the Tories get into power they're lured into nanny-statism. Thatcher had enough about her to push against that for several years. Imperfect though such direction might prove I think it is beneficial. Reducing the size of the state should be top of the list for any government.Luckyguy1983 said:
Where was the voting market behind monetarism when MT made that her guiding theme? There wasn't one. She decided that that was the right thing for Britain, and set about winning the arguments. That's how you get positive change. Crafting your platform out of a mishmash of what voters have found acceptable up until now is not a plan to get into (or stay in) government; it's a way to go around in circles achieving very little.rcs1000 said:On topic, but also a little bit of a rant.
The Conservative Party has, for so long, been a successful political party because it has been able to tie together disparate groups, who don't all share exactly the same ideology.
And it's done this by being pragmatic and remembering that there are going to be people who believe homosexuality is a sin, and there are going to be people are publicly gay, but they might share common views about - say - the size of the state.
I'm reminded of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who was caught on tape saying that the US was in a (culture) war, and there would only be one winner.
No, Justice Alito, there is no winner. You cannot silence the voices of the 50% of people who disagree with you without actual war. And that actual war (see the Thirty Years War for an example) will end with everyone grudgingly agreeing that actually they can't agree and they can't force other people to agree with them.
The Conservative Party cannot just be the party of people left behind by globalisation. Nor can it just be the party of pensioners. Nor can it just be the party of wealthy plutocrats. It needs to be a big tent. If you choose to silence - or make unwelcome - the voices that disagree with you, then you are consigning yourself to electoral oblivion.
This is why "we didn't win because we weren't centrist enough" and "we didn't win because we weren't right wing enough" are both bullshit arguments. You didn't win because you were unable to make the tent big enough.
And I also don't think the issue is that Tories 'haven't been right wing enough', it's that they have sold themselves as the right wing alternative, benefitted from doing so, and changed their minds completely when it comes to actually doing anything right wing. That's a question of trust, rather than a question of politics. Those who feel that they haven't been centrist enough should vote for parties that espouse social democracy, of which there are two in the political mainstream. Why do they need a third? It smacks of reducing the alternatives available to voters because they aren't actually that confident in the attractiveness of their centrist prospectus.
The number of people of pensionable age is rising every year: we have promised them (repeatedly) that there is no circumstance where their pensions will grow less than 2% or wages or inflation. In addition, the proportion of people who are pensioners will grow every year. And a pensioner costs approximately 15x as much in social and health care as someone in their 20s.
So: interest payments, healthcare and pension cost increases are nailed on. And they are half the budget.
We need to spend more on defence.
Policing and the administration of justice have been cut to the bone.
I want to cut the size of the state too. But we all need to be realistic about the challenges facing us with a greying population.2 -
Boris Johnson in 2016?BatteryCorrectHorse said:Does anyone remember that chap who stood for the Tories as leader for literally a day and then pulled out
0 -
If they're hitting it, it's because they're not sure it's in the bag. They don't do it for fun or for want of information.wooliedyed said:Labour hitting Basingstoke again? Easy gain. Better fruit to pick
Reform might be peeling away some of their edge, and the LDs.0 -
deleted duplicate0
-
It includes part of Mid Suffolk council which was unexpectedly won by the Greens in a recent local election.kle4 said:
Waveney Valley seems like a real hodgepodge of a seat - it is made up of 5 current seats, with no single part making up more than 41% of the new seat.Andy_JS said:Waveney Valley and Bristol Central go to the Greens, but they lose Brighton Pavilion.
Farage wins Clacton easily with 53%.
Wiki says the Greens won a lot of council seats in 2023 in the area, but it doesn't seem like a Brighton or Bristol type situation where they've been pushing hard locally for ages. Interesting.0 -
It's a chilling read for those of us of even a moderate centre right persuasion but if a centre right party/parties win at some future point then all undoable. The real fear i have is an elected second chamber being brought in with PR and thus with a permanent leftie majority defeating everything a new right wing Commons seeks to enact. That would lead to a real clash, in theory the Commons could vote to repeal the Act that brought in the second chamber but if Labour changes the law to remove the primacy of the Commons then i don't see how that would work. That's what scares me a bit.Casino_Royale said:
Anyone with a brain knows Labour will do what left-wing governments do in office and SKS will only reveal his true colours once in office.Leon said:
His central thesis is that Labour are fucked economically, and stuck with few choices - which is true - so they will have to raise taxes just to stand still (this is not their fault, of course, they are inheriting a fiscal nightmare)PedestrianRock said:
Just read that thread. Most of it read linked “Labour have said they will do X…but what if they do Y? That would be terrifying”Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
Not saying they will stick to the manifesto at all but there wasn’t much in there which seemed credibly scary.
They won't be able to throw money at public services, so in the absence of that they will do loads of Woke things to keep activists and MPs happy, they won't tackle immigration, or the boat people, they will follow Scotland and Wales on education and health (God help us), they will follow Scotland on Trans, they will do awful, damaging things
Hence, I believe, a brutal backlash in five years when desperate voters reach for the hard right, not just the right
If Skyr Toolmakersson can prove me wrong, I will buy him - or me - a bottle of Brennivin by way of relief and celebration
You don't have to vote for it.
Tbh, I'm more worried about whether a centre right government will ever get elected at all for the rest of my life. I'm 47...0 -
New Thread
0 -
Who cares about politics? The sun is shining. And the football is on.0
-
They did until about 2005, but understandable that they don't now.Casino_Royale said:
Tories, except landowners in farmers fields or candidates, don't really do posters.Andy_JS said:I remember posting on here that at GE2017 I only saw one Tory poster during the entire campaign, which was in a field just outside Maidenhead IIRC. Yet the Tories got 44% of the vote.
0 -
I blame the local council for their pretensions of grandeur ... apparently it was originally intended to name the constituency Pebble, Lesser Wyrley & Pinkridge.kle4 said:
That constituency name is so long I assumed it must be in Scotland.Andy_JS said:Gavin Williamson forecast to get 50% in his new seat of Stone, Great Wyrley & Penkridge.
Con 50%
Lab 38%
LD 7%
Grn 5%
And it's Sir Gavin Williamson, never forget what this great man did to earn his accolades.0 -
It will. The bigger issue is whether it had the Cojones to overturn the above.BobSykes said:
It's a chilling read for those of us of even a moderate centre right persuasion but if a centre right party/parties win at some future point then all undoable. The real fear i have is an elected second chamber being brought in with PR and thus with a permanent leftie majority defeating everything a new right wing Commons seeks to enact. That would lead to a real clash, in theory the Commons could vote to repeal the Act that brought in the second chamber but if Labour changes the law to remove the primacy of the Commons then i don't see how that would work. That's what scares me a bit.Casino_Royale said:
Anyone with a brain knows Labour will do what left-wing governments do in office and SKS will only reveal his true colours once in office.Leon said:
His central thesis is that Labour are fucked economically, and stuck with few choices - which is true - so they will have to raise taxes just to stand still (this is not their fault, of course, they are inheriting a fiscal nightmare)PedestrianRock said:
Just read that thread. Most of it read linked “Labour have said they will do X…but what if they do Y? That would be terrifying”Leon said:An absolutely terrifying thread about what an actual Labour government will be like
https://x.com/admcollingwood/status/1803104439697313995
"In November, long before #zeroseats, even as the media was reporting politics as usual, I wrote a thread on why the Tories were heading for an epochal defeat. Now that this is received wisdom, it's time for a new thread, forecasting how Labour will govern. Be very afraid."
I pray that this dude is wrong; I fear in my vittals that he is bang on
Not saying they will stick to the manifesto at all but there wasn’t much in there which seemed credibly scary.
They won't be able to throw money at public services, so in the absence of that they will do loads of Woke things to keep activists and MPs happy, they won't tackle immigration, or the boat people, they will follow Scotland and Wales on education and health (God help us), they will follow Scotland on Trans, they will do awful, damaging things
Hence, I believe, a brutal backlash in five years when desperate voters reach for the hard right, not just the right
If Skyr Toolmakersson can prove me wrong, I will buy him - or me - a bottle of Brennivin by way of relief and celebration
You don't have to vote for it.
Tbh, I'm more worried about whether a centre right government will ever get elected at all for the rest of my life. I'm 47...
Thatcher did. Most Tory Wet PMs don't.0 -
Why? You think I'm going to take them down?BatteryCorrectHorse said:
I'll pop some photos on later if you'd like. But to reveal where they are would reveal the location which I'd rather not do!Casino_Royale said:
I live in East Hants and I haven't seen Lib Dem posters anywhere.BatteryCorrectHorse said:Just had a report in from my parents in a posh bit of East Hants. Apparently Lib Dem posters everywhere whatever that means
I've been all around Alton and haven't seen any.
There is graffiti in the park with a picture of a mug on a substation cabinet with an arrow pointing to it that says "Rishi Sunak", but that's been there for over a year.0 -
Wait it's Keir Starmer's definition of working people that excludes pensioners is it? Whose definition of working people includes them?TheScreamingEagles said:Ugh.
Sir Keir Starmer has opened the door to tax rises for millions of Britons by defining a working person as someone who relies on public services and doesn’t have savings.
The Labour leader has repeatedly ruled out putting up taxes on what he calls “working people” who he says have borne the brunt of the cost of living crisis.
Asked what he meant by the term, he said it refers to “people who earn their living, rely on our services and don’t really have the ability to write a cheque when they get into trouble”.
His definition means millions of Britons including pensioners, savers, and those who use private services like healthcare may not be covered by his tax rise pledge.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/18/starmer-leaves-door-open-to-tax-rises-for-millions/
If pensioners are required to pay the same rate of income as everyone else earning the same salary that would be entirely justified and not cost working people a penny.0 -
The MRP does not take into account the targeting. It has the LDs behind Lab in seats they are targeting (because of Lab being high in the polls and LDs being low) and winning seats they are not targeting (I can think of one near me). I suggest you look at the ground war around you. Who is winning the leafleting and poster war. That is a good guide to who the challenger is.Heathener said:
From the MORI-IPSOS MRP on Newton AbbotHeathener said:
Can I ask you please to be searingly honest? Are you a LibDem voter? Your “nothing […] in any manner” makes me less, not more, likely to believe you. It’s overdone.Pro_Rata said:
There is nothing about Newton Abbot that says Labour to me in any manner for a tactical vote. Lib Dem all the way.Heathener said:
Actually that’s a really good point as well. Some of the undecideds may be Tactical Voters?Foxy said:
I am showing up in the polls (not this one) as undecided, but will definitely vote. I don't think I am the only one on this board.ydoethur said:I would have thought the most likely outcome for a big chunk of that 43% is not voting at all. If they've got so far and are still uncertain...
My Newton Abbot constituency is conflicted!
Best for Britain tell me to vote Labour: https://www.getvoting.org/constituency/E14001381
Tactical.vote tell me to vote LibDem:
https://tactical.vote/newton-abbot/
and
TacticalVote.co.uk haven’t yet made up their mind!
https://tacticalvote.co.uk/#NewtonAbbot
So whereas I thought I might have to vote LibDem, I’m no longer sure!
Tactical.Vote didn’t even think about it, seemingly. They put LibDem from the word go.
Best for Britain took 3 weeks to weigh it up, carefully, and concluded that I should vote Labour.
@Pro_Rata this is exactly what I was saying earlier. Newton Abbot is leaning Conservative but with Labour, not the LibDems, in second
By the way when you were in Woking you were spot on. I know it very well.1 -
Thanks @kjhkjh said:
The MRP does not take into account the targeting. It has the LDs behind Lab in seats they are targeting (because of Lab being high in the polls and LDs being low) and winning seats they are not targeting (I can think of one near me). I suggest you look at the ground war around you. Who is winning the leafleting and poster war. That is a good guide to who the challenger is.Heathener said:
From the MORI-IPSOS MRP on Newton AbbotHeathener said:
Can I ask you please to be searingly honest? Are you a LibDem voter? Your “nothing […] in any manner” makes me less, not more, likely to believe you. It’s overdone.Pro_Rata said:
There is nothing about Newton Abbot that says Labour to me in any manner for a tactical vote. Lib Dem all the way.Heathener said:
Actually that’s a really good point as well. Some of the undecideds may be Tactical Voters?Foxy said:
I am showing up in the polls (not this one) as undecided, but will definitely vote. I don't think I am the only one on this board.ydoethur said:I would have thought the most likely outcome for a big chunk of that 43% is not voting at all. If they've got so far and are still uncertain...
My Newton Abbot constituency is conflicted!
Best for Britain tell me to vote Labour: https://www.getvoting.org/constituency/E14001381
Tactical.vote tell me to vote LibDem:
https://tactical.vote/newton-abbot/
and
TacticalVote.co.uk haven’t yet made up their mind!
https://tacticalvote.co.uk/#NewtonAbbot
So whereas I thought I might have to vote LibDem, I’m no longer sure!
Tactical.Vote didn’t even think about it, seemingly. They put LibDem from the word go.
Best for Britain took 3 weeks to weigh it up, carefully, and concluded that I should vote Labour.
@Pro_Rata this is exactly what I was saying earlier. Newton Abbot is leaning Conservative but with Labour, not the LibDems, in second
By the way when you were in Woking you were spot on. I know it very well.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Newton Abbot opposition splits again and Anne Morris is re-elected.
This MRP has Woking as neck-and-neck but I very much doubt that. I think it’s solid LibDem now. They’re putting in a big ground war.0 -
Remember that the MRPs are working from broad demographic models, not decent sized hyper local samples. They can pick up local swings when these reflect wider trends - as happened with both Canterbury and Kensington during their first outing at a GE - but have no way of picking up local factors or local campaigning in a particular seat. The seat by seat predictions are afforded too much weight, IMO, and we need to be thinking whether we are trying to discern the local impact of wider demographic voting shifts - which MRPs are good at - or how well a particular party is campaigning in a particular seat - which the MRP will miss entirely.Andy_JS said:Both Montgomery and Brecon -> LDs in third place, which is different to other MRPs.
2
