Sunak’s strategy is working – politicalbetting.com

A surprisingly low fraction say it’s be a good thing compared to the overall VI.

RobD said:

A surprisingly low fraction say it’s be a good thing compared to the overall VI.

I suspect it will be higher overall, this stat is for currently undecided voters, who generally skew as 2019 Tories.

Labour one short of a majority and Corbyn winning his seat would the ultimate shitz n gigglez outcome.

Didn't Lynton Crosby use this tactic in an Australian provincial election, which resulted in an unexpected victory for the party expected to lose?

A Tory wipeout - which amounts to the same thing as a huge Lab majority - would be good for Conservatism. It gives them no room for saying that one more heave to the fringe right will get there, and requires them to think about the nature of the centre right party which could get back its traditional voters (including me). There are about 15,000,000+ voters who could vote Tory. Leave it 10 more years and they will never return.

MarqueeMark said:

Labour one short of a majority and Corbyn winning his seat would the ultimate shitz n gigglez outcome.

A Con/Reform/DUP/Corbyn/Galloway rainbow coalition is the way forward.

@taylorswift13
Happy Bday M8! London shows are off to a splendid start 🇬🇧🇺🇸🤝

@KensingtonRoyal



So the future King is a Swiftie, the future PM is a Swiftie.

It is a regret of mine that I only ever did work for the second most famous woman in the World (the late Queen Elizabeth) and not the most famous woman in the World (Taylor Swift)

MarqueeMark said:

Labour one short of a majority and Corbyn winning his seat would the ultimate shitz n gigglez outcome.

Shitz but not too many giggles from a betting perspective, however!

DavidL said:

I don't think it makes a lot of difference one way or the other. A majority of more than 50 is secure and an elective dictatorship, that is the way our system works. A majority of 250 doesn't give more power than that.

And, after this election, it appears our scope for what is possible is about to be significantly expanded. If Labour can gain 250 seats in an election they can lose them again. We just have to accept that things are more volatile than they were.

A majority of 50 means backbench rebellions over issues, like ID cards, can kill it.

A majority of 250 means you can absolutely dictate.

The Tory on Any Questions accepting that we should at least “have a conversation” about electoral reform…a first straw in the wind?

I don't think the poll in the header tells us anything at all, really. It's hardly surprising that a significant proportion of undecided voters think a huge majority for Labour would not be a good thing. Presumably most of those who do think a huge Labour majority would be a good thing have already decided to vote Labour.

Andy_JS said:

Didn't Lynton Crosby use this tactic in an Australian provincial election, which resulted in an unexpected victory for the party expected to lose?

Now retronymed as "The Queensland Gambit" or "The Queensland Effect"

https://www.markpack.org.uk/173220/the-sad-puppy-gambit-and-other-general-election-news-ldn-185/
https://www.reddit.com/r/LibDem/comments/1dl2jtk/the_sad_puppy_gambit_and_other_general_election/
https://www.clivejames.com/general-election-sequence-2001.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jun/04/worlddispatch.election2001

Northern_Al said:

I don't think the poll in the header tells us anything at all, really. It's hardly surprising that a significant proportion of undecided voters think a huge majority for Labour would not be a good thing. Presumably most of those who do think a huge Labour majority would be a good thing have already decided to vote Labour.

Also from YouGov: One in eight current Tory voters (12%) would be happy to see the Tories lose badly, while another 18% would be neither happy nor unhappy.

@isam has not been active on here for 5 weeks. Anyone heard from him?

eek said:

IanB2 said:

The Tory on Any Questions accepting that we should at least “have a conversation” about electoral reform…a first straw in the wind?

The system that has worked to our advantage since 1945 now looks to be working against us. Boo hoo....

Sorry I want electoral reform but it's not a priority I can think of 20-30 other issues that are more pressing because the previous Government did nothing to solve any of those issues.

Indeed.

I’d also insist on House of Lords reform as part of the change to the voting system.

Bonkers to have more unelected peers than actual MPs.

Well played with that title, very attention grabbing.

Of course, lots of people think alarge majorities are a bad idea, but will it really have an impact. You say Psephologists suggest it will, but there's not a lot of time left, 'up to 2 weeks' to do so could mean that things just to have effect by the election, but not enough to be significant.

eek said:

IanB2 said:

The Tory on Any Questions accepting that we should at least “have a conversation” about electoral reform…a first straw in the wind?

The system that has worked to our advantage since 1945 now looks to be working against us. Boo hoo....

Sorry I want electoral reform but it's not a priority I can think of 20-30 other issues that are more pressing because the previous Government did nothing to solve any of those issues.

Labour would probably focus on quick, easy to achieve electoral changes rather than spend time and capital on it. Hence votes at 16 but surprisingly not changes to voter ID rules.

TheScreamingEagles said:

eek said:

IanB2 said:

The Tory on Any Questions accepting that we should at least “have a conversation” about electoral reform…a first straw in the wind?

The system that has worked to our advantage since 1945 now looks to be working against us. Boo hoo....

Sorry I want electoral reform but it's not a priority I can think of 20-30 other issues that are more pressing because the previous Government did nothing to solve any of those issues.

Indeed.

I’d also insist on House of Lords reform as part of the change to the voting system.

Bonkers to have more unelected peers than actual MPs.

Labour have announced some fairly straightforward proposals to that effect, which could be an indication that the larger issue will be parked after some easy reductions - eg unelected peers out, age limits.

eek said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

eek said:

IanB2 said:

The Tory on Any Questions accepting that we should at least “have a conversation” about electoral reform…a first straw in the wind?

The system that has worked to our advantage since 1945 now looks to be working against us. Boo hoo....

Sorry I want electoral reform but it's not a priority I can think of 20-30 other issues that are more pressing because the previous Government did nothing to solve any of those issues.

Indeed.

I’d also insist on House of Lords reform as part of the change to the voting system.

Bonkers to have more unelected peers than actual MPs.

The thing there is that our unelected second chamber actually works in providing real expertise in some areas and I'm not sure an elected second chamber would solve anything...

The trouble they have with an elected second chamber using PR is that it could be seen as the more legitimate house, by dint of actually being representative.

Farooq said:

ANME update:
Postal ballot has arrived and it didn't occur to me before looking at it that @RochdalePioneers name is alphabetically first on the list. Anybody know how much of a boost that's worth? It is a small boost, isn't it?

It’s a bigger boost in a multi-vote election, or a preferential election. In single member FPTP it probably isn’t worth that much.

Farooq said:

ANME update:
Postal ballot has arrived and it didn't occur to me before looking at it that @RochdalePioneers name is alphabetically first on the list. Anybody know how much of a boost that's worth? It is a small boost, isn't it?

If it becomes a 'plague on both their houses' election, being the first might help.

Farooq said:

ANME update:
Postal ballot has arrived and it didn't occur to me before looking at it that @RochdalePioneers name is alphabetically first on the list. Anybody know how much of a boost that's worth? It is a small boost, isn't it?

Even with the Tories and Labour candidates sabotaging themselves, given results in your area previously it'd have to be one heck of a boost to be worth anything to the LD candidate.

A quick scan at one american study suggested a couple of percent was possible.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

eek said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

eek said:

IanB2 said:

The Tory on Any Questions accepting that we should at least “have a conversation” about electoral reform…a first straw in the wind?

The system that has worked to our advantage since 1945 now looks to be working against us. Boo hoo....

Sorry I want electoral reform but it's not a priority I can think of 20-30 other issues that are more pressing because the previous Government did nothing to solve any of those issues.

Indeed.

I’d also insist on House of Lords reform as part of the change to the voting system.

Bonkers to have more unelected peers than actual MPs.

The thing there is that our unelected second chamber actually works in providing real expertise in some areas and I'm not sure an elected second chamber would solve anything...

Unelected Has-Beens!

You've always been wrong on that Sunil, as you know there are plenty of never-beens as well.

Foxy said:

DavidL said:

I don't think it makes a lot of difference one way or the other. A majority of more than 50 is secure and an elective dictatorship, that is the way our system works. A majority of 250 doesn't give more power than that.

And, after this election, it appears our scope for what is possible is about to be significantly expanded. If Labour can gain 250 seats in an election they can lose them again. We just have to accept that things are more volatile than they were.

I remember in the 1980s Francis Pym getting a caning for suggesting that a very large majority is a bad thing.

It was true, and remains true.

Is that in the same way of 'this is a good election to lose' truisms (or rather supposed truism)?

It seems to me to be bad, at most, in the long term, which a government will believe it can avoid, or in a theoretical sense. When the reality is it is always better to win an election and see if you can in fact overcome problems than lose, and it is better to have a big majority which might be unwieldy than have a small one which limits your options.

Farooq said:

kle4 said:

Farooq said:

ANME update:
Postal ballot has arrived and it didn't occur to me before looking at it that @RochdalePioneers name is alphabetically first on the list. Anybody know how much of a boost that's worth? It is a small boost, isn't it?

Even with the Tories and Labour candidates sabotaging themselves, given results in your area previously it'd have to be one heck of a boost to be worth anything to the LD candidate.

A quick scan at one american study suggested a couple of percent was possible.

Don't get me wrong, I've been consistent in saying I don't think the Lib Dems have a chance here. And to be sure, the Reform candidate was also in trouble, literally on the front cover of the Daily Mail a few days ago.
I do hope Rochdale beats Reform, so that potential small % boost might be meaningful.

FYI the order on the ballot is
Lib Dem
Labour
Reform
SNP
Conservative

The Reform one was in trouble as well? That SNP candidate must be the luckiest in all Scotland!

If you support plucky underdogs you have to be rooting for Georgia
… and they're exciting to watch

Benpointer said:

Sandpit said:

Casino_Royale said:

DavidL said:

I don't think it makes a lot of difference one way or the other. A majority of more than 50 is secure and an elective dictatorship, that is the way our system works. A majority of 250 doesn't give more power than that.

And, after this election, it appears our scope for what is possible is about to be significantly expanded. If Labour can gain 250 seats in an election they can lose them again. We just have to accept that things are more volatile than they were.

A majority of 50 means backbench rebellions over issues, like ID cards, can kill it.

A majority of 250 means you can absolutely dictate.

Which means a much higher chance of the usual CS hit list of crap policies seeing some get taken up. Like ID cards.

Thankfully there’s no majority in the Lords, their role of providing pushback to the government of the day is most important at a time like that.

Another argument against Lords being elected, is that, as in the US, you can get a situation where one party has a majority everywhere and can do what the hell they like.

Yes, I remember you complaining bitterly about exactly that after Johnson won his big majority in 2019.

That was a majority of 80, not of 200. And the Lords did their job for much of what Johnson proposed.

kle4 said:

Casino_Royale said:

DavidL said:

I don't think it makes a lot of difference one way or the other. A majority of more than 50 is secure and an elective dictatorship, that is the way our system works. A majority of 250 doesn't give more power than that.

And, after this election, it appears our scope for what is possible is about to be significantly expanded. If Labour can gain 250 seats in an election they can lose them again. We just have to accept that things are more volatile than they were.

A majority of 50 means backbench rebellions over issues, like ID cards, can kill it.

A majority of 250 means you can absolutely dictate.

The rebellions can be both more frequent and larger, but still able to be overcome. I don't quite buy the idea some have advanced that a really huge majority has not additional benefits, or is in fact a negative.

Sure, in the long term it could be unwieldy and fractious, but most MPs are loyalists or go with the flow - of course they do, most will not be experts on every issue and have loyalty to the party if the whip instructions are given.

After all, the government has had a majority of 80ish falling to 40ish over the last five years. Have there been any significant defeats on the floor of the Commons? There have been a couple of times (planning reform, leaseholds, and I think something else) where the government has backed down before the vote because it expected to lose. Besides, a majority is an irregular adjective; "my huge majority allows me to fulfil my mandate from the people, your huge majority is an elective dictatorship."

Bit of a sidetrack- the two weeks thing. Yes, it's true. And now we're less than a fortnight from polling day. Even ignoring postal voters, the campaign is running out of time to have an effect on voters. The government is in a similar position to Captain Blackadder in the final five minutes of the final episode. Good luck, everyone.

C'mon Georgia!
edit … yay!

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

The Tories are pretty screwed if Reform get anything above 10% (and pretty badly hurt even if it is below that), but they surely should be aiming to drive it down, and that requires both push and pull factors - appeal to what Reform voters want, the pull, but also highlight Farage and his party's unpalatable views on things, the push.

Nothing much so far seems to have made Reform minded people waver - sure, some people will still agree with Farage over it, but it's about the only thing he's offered up which might shake a few voters loose if the Tories go after it.

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

The Tories are pretty screwed if Reform get anything above 10% (and pretty badly hurt even if it is below that), but they surely should be aiming to drive it down, and that requires both push and pull factors - appeal to what Reform voters want, the pull, but also highlight Farage and his party's unpalatable views on things, the push.

Nothing much so far seems to have made Reform minded people waver - sure, some people will still agree with Farage over it, but it's about the only thing he's offered up which might shake a few voters loose if the Tories go after it.

Tories will only go for it if they can see some personal ££ benefit..

Penddu2 said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

The Tories are pretty screwed if Reform get anything above 10% (and pretty badly hurt even if it is below that), but they surely should be aiming to drive it down, and that requires both push and pull factors - appeal to what Reform voters want, the pull, but also highlight Farage and his party's unpalatable views on things, the push.

Nothing much so far seems to have made Reform minded people waver - sure, some people will still agree with Farage over it, but it's about the only thing he's offered up which might shake a few voters loose if the Tories go after it.

Tories will only go for it if they can see some personal ££ benefit..

It could mean more get re-elected, that should be all the personal benefit they need.

If they don't go for it not only do they think it won't help get them get re-elected, but they have no other ideas on how the might.

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

"National ULEZ"? Don't threaten me with a good time...

kle4 said:

Farooq said:

kle4 said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

eek said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

eek said:

IanB2 said:

The Tory on Any Questions accepting that we should at least “have a conversation” about electoral reform…a first straw in the wind?

The system that has worked to our advantage since 1945 now looks to be working against us. Boo hoo....

Sorry I want electoral reform but it's not a priority I can think of 20-30 other issues that are more pressing because the previous Government did nothing to solve any of those issues.

Indeed.

I’d also insist on House of Lords reform as part of the change to the voting system.

Bonkers to have more unelected peers than actual MPs.

The thing there is that our unelected second chamber actually works in providing real expertise in some areas and I'm not sure an elected second chamber would solve anything...

Unelected Has-Beens!

You've always been wrong on that Sunil, as you know there are plenty of never-beens as well.

Some of them are elected, too. In November Lord Camoys beat the Marquess of Bristol and the Lord Hamilton of Dalzell to gain a seat. He won a whopping 56% of the vote -- 133 out of the 236 votes cast. Hashtag democracy.

My favourite election of all time was a House of Lords by-election in 2016.

Lord Avebury had died, and there needed to be a replacement, and the only eligible voters were other Liberal Democrat heriditary peers (why some are elected by the whole house and others are not I do not know).

The election was under AV, with 3 eligible voters able to choose from 7 candidates. The winner received all 3 1st preference votes.

To make it even more fun, the winner was Viscount Thurso, previous member of the Lords from 1995-1999, and then MP from 2001-2015.

https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/publications-records/House-of-Lords-Publications/By-elections/Result-Liberal-Democrat-hereditary-peers-by-election-result-Avebury.pdf.pdf?shiftFileName=Result-Liberal-Democrat-hereditary-peers-by-election-result-Avebury.pdf.pdf&shiftSavePath=/documents/publications-records/House-of-Lords-Publications/By-elections

If you ask me, such a hilarious outcome is itself worth retaining the current arrangements.

Michael Onslow commented, at the time, that a hundred years on his grandson would stand up in the Lords and say, 'My lords, nobody would ever have invented such a system through choice, but as we have it and it works, why change it?'

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

You don’t have to ask who he’s working for, you merely quote him from yesterday, show the RT videos, than move on to images of the war and of those affected.

Perhaps a few quotes from photogenic young refugees in Clacton, of what they think caused the war?

Leon said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

The Tories are pretty screwed if Reform get anything above 10% (and pretty badly hurt even if it is below that), but they surely should be aiming to drive it down, and that requires both push and pull factors - appeal to what Reform voters want, the pull, but also highlight Farage and his party's unpalatable views on things, the push.

Nothing much so far seems to have made Reform minded people waver - sure, some people will still agree with Farage over it, but it's about the only thing he's offered up which might shake a few voters loose if the Tories go after it.

Quite so

This is - potentially - the first bit of real luck the Tories have had in the entire campaign. But gaining the benefit requires them to go on the offensive, against Farage. "He's in Putin's pocket, here is the proof"

And I loathe the Tories and want them destroyed, so this is not cheerleading; I can simply perceive a major opportunity. Same as I saw for the Lib Dems on the EU (which they have not taken, either)

If the Tories don't exploit this it means

1. They really have given up

or

2. Their entire campaign team really is infested with Labour/Reform traitors, trying to sabotage them from the inside

Blame the Eleventh (Republican) Commandment,

Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican.

Made famous by Ronnie Regan, originally coined by Gaylord Parkinson in the 1960s.

For a meaningful chunk of the Conservative Party, Farage is a Conservative who tragically happens to be the wrong side of the Iron Curtain for now. Therefore not to be crticised.

But yes. Photoshop of Putin doing to Farage what Harry Corbett did to Sooty.

Leon said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

The Tories are pretty screwed if Reform get anything above 10% (and pretty badly hurt even if it is below that), but they surely should be aiming to drive it down, and that requires both push and pull factors - appeal to what Reform voters want, the pull, but also highlight Farage and his party's unpalatable views on things, the push.

Nothing much so far seems to have made Reform minded people waver - sure, some people will still agree with Farage over it, but it's about the only thing he's offered up which might shake a few voters loose if the Tories go after it.

Quite so

This is - potentially - the first bit of real luck the Tories have had in the entire campaign. But gaining the benefit requires them to go on the offensive, against Farage. "He's in Putin's pocket, here is the proof"

And I loathe the Tories and want them destroyed, so this is not cheerleading; I can simply perceive a major opportunity. Same as I saw for the Lib Dems on the EU (which they have not taken, either)

If the Tories don't exploit this it means

1. They really have given up

or

2. Their entire campaign team really is infested with Labour/Reform traitors, trying to sabotage them from the inside

3) They have taken Russian money themselves over the years, and don’t want to open the debate.

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

But if he isn't a paid Putinite puppet (or if there's just no actual evidence that he is), that approach could be very dangerous. Farage is very good at getting apologies off people. CCHQ doesn't want to be in the position at having to apologise publicly to him during an election campaign.

ydoethur said:

kle4 said:

Farooq said:

kle4 said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

eek said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

eek said:

IanB2 said:

The Tory on Any Questions accepting that we should at least “have a conversation” about electoral reform…a first straw in the wind?

The system that has worked to our advantage since 1945 now looks to be working against us. Boo hoo....

Sorry I want electoral reform but it's not a priority I can think of 20-30 other issues that are more pressing because the previous Government did nothing to solve any of those issues.

Indeed.

I’d also insist on House of Lords reform as part of the change to the voting system.

Bonkers to have more unelected peers than actual MPs.

The thing there is that our unelected second chamber actually works in providing real expertise in some areas and I'm not sure an elected second chamber would solve anything...

Unelected Has-Beens!

You've always been wrong on that Sunil, as you know there are plenty of never-beens as well.

Some of them are elected, too. In November Lord Camoys beat the Marquess of Bristol and the Lord Hamilton of Dalzell to gain a seat. He won a whopping 56% of the vote -- 133 out of the 236 votes cast. Hashtag democracy.

My favourite election of all time was a House of Lords by-election in 2016.

Lord Avebury had died, and there needed to be a replacement, and the only eligible voters were other Liberal Democrat heriditary peers (why some are elected by the whole house and others are not I do not know).

The election was under AV, with 3 eligible voters able to choose from 7 candidates. The winner received all 3 1st preference votes.

To make it even more fun, the winner was Viscount Thurso, previous member of the Lords from 1995-1999, and then MP from 2001-2015.

https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/publications-records/House-of-Lords-Publications/By-elections/Result-Liberal-Democrat-hereditary-peers-by-election-result-Avebury.pdf.pdf?shiftFileName=Result-Liberal-Democrat-hereditary-peers-by-election-result-Avebury.pdf.pdf&shiftSavePath=/documents/publications-records/House-of-Lords-Publications/By-elections

If you ask me, such a hilarious outcome is itself worth retaining the current arrangements.

Michael Onslow commented, at the time, that a hundred years on his grandson would stand up in the Lords and say, 'My lords, nobody would ever have invented such a system through choice, but as we have it and it works, why change it?'

I do think some changes are necessary and appropriate without junking the whole thing, but that is generally my view of some of the sillier traditions and conventions we have.

I think some people have a tendency to really overplay the effect of harmless eccentricities or ceremony, and fool themselves that if we only got rid of Black Rod having a door shut in their face the common people would engage much more with democracy, or not being able to refer directly to other Members of the House is so archaic a custom it is holding back said engagement.

If a convention or system works well enough, then oddities give it interest and flavour. If it doesn't work, sure, adapt. That's why MPs are allowed to read notes from an Ipad but are not supposed to read a speech verbatim for example, because no notes is not helpful, but they are supposed to be listening to each other, not just reading a speech.

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

But if he isn't a paid Putinite puppet (or if there's just no actual evidence that he is), that approach could be very dangerous. Putin is very good at getting apologies off people. CCHQ doesn't want to be in the position at having to apologise publicly to him during an election campaign.

"Putin is very good at getting apologies off people."

You mean they apologise as Putin's lackeys are dangling them out of a sixth floor window?

biggles said:

Leon said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

The Tories are pretty screwed if Reform get anything above 10% (and pretty badly hurt even if it is below that), but they surely should be aiming to drive it down, and that requires both push and pull factors - appeal to what Reform voters want, the pull, but also highlight Farage and his party's unpalatable views on things, the push.

Nothing much so far seems to have made Reform minded people waver - sure, some people will still agree with Farage over it, but it's about the only thing he's offered up which might shake a few voters loose if the Tories go after it.

Quite so

This is - potentially - the first bit of real luck the Tories have had in the entire campaign. But gaining the benefit requires them to go on the offensive, against Farage. "He's in Putin's pocket, here is the proof"

And I loathe the Tories and want them destroyed, so this is not cheerleading; I can simply perceive a major opportunity. Same as I saw for the Lib Dems on the EU (which they have not taken, either)

If the Tories don't exploit this it means

1. They really have given up

or

2. Their entire campaign team really is infested with Labour/Reform traitors, trying to sabotage them from the inside

3) They have taken Russian money themselves over the years, and don’t want to open the debate.

lol. I hadn't thought of that. Who knows?

The post-truth world is a tricky place. It's one reason - I realise - people cling to black and white opinions when, in fact, disappointing grey is the reality. Moral certainty is now seen as superior, and definitely more satisfying, than difficult truth. The lived experience triumphs over actual experience. What you feel is more important than facts

We see it on PB, we see it everywhere

I would be interested to see if predictions of SNP seats has shifted much overall during the course of the campaign.

Is their vote holding up better than expected, or worse? Is the national Tory situation so terrible than early predictions that they could in fact hold some Scottish seats from the SNP now out of the question? Are the LDs making any inroads anywhere? Are Labour underperforming compared to the national position?

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

But if he isn't a paid Putinite puppet (or if there's just no actual evidence that he is), that approach could be very dangerous. Putin is very good at getting apologies off people. CCHQ doesn't want to be in the position at having to apologise publicly to him during an election campaign.

"Putin is very good at getting apologies off people."

You mean they apologise as Putin's lackeys are dangling them out of a sixth floor window?

Freudian typo. Putin is very good at getting apologies off people no doubt - but NF wrote the book.

Leon said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

The Tories are pretty screwed if Reform get anything above 10% (and pretty badly hurt even if it is below that), but they surely should be aiming to drive it down, and that requires both push and pull factors - appeal to what Reform voters want, the pull, but also highlight Farage and his party's unpalatable views on things, the push.

Nothing much so far seems to have made Reform minded people waver - sure, some people will still agree with Farage over it, but it's about the only thing he's offered up which might shake a few voters loose if the Tories go after it.

Quite so

This is - potentially - the first bit of real luck the Tories have had in the entire campaign. But gaining the benefit requires them to go on the offensive, against Farage. "He's in Putin's pocket, here is the proof"

And I loathe the Tories and want them destroyed, so this is not cheerleading; I can simply perceive a major opportunity. Same as I saw for the Lib Dems on the EU (which they have not taken, either)

If the Tories don't exploit this it means

1. They really have given up

or

2. Their entire campaign team really is infested with Labour/Reform traitors, trying to sabotage them from the inside

If this results in a loss of support by Reform, we are just back to the perennial question of where it will go.

If it reduces the Labour lead over the Tories at all, I doubt it will do so by very much. The impression from the polls is that the growth in Reform support since Farage's putsch has drawn from both Labour and the Tories.

On topic, file under mildly amusing that a plurality of undecided voters were undecided on the question asked. Would hate to go to a restaurant with them.

Chris said:

Leon said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

The Tories are pretty screwed if Reform get anything above 10% (and pretty badly hurt even if it is below that), but they surely should be aiming to drive it down, and that requires both push and pull factors - appeal to what Reform voters want, the pull, but also highlight Farage and his party's unpalatable views on things, the push.

Nothing much so far seems to have made Reform minded people waver - sure, some people will still agree with Farage over it, but it's about the only thing he's offered up which might shake a few voters loose if the Tories go after it.

Quite so

This is - potentially - the first bit of real luck the Tories have had in the entire campaign. But gaining the benefit requires them to go on the offensive, against Farage. "He's in Putin's pocket, here is the proof"

And I loathe the Tories and want them destroyed, so this is not cheerleading; I can simply perceive a major opportunity. Same as I saw for the Lib Dems on the EU (which they have not taken, either)

If the Tories don't exploit this it means

1. They really have given up

or

2. Their entire campaign team really is infested with Labour/Reform traitors, trying to sabotage them from the inside

If this results in a loss of support by Reform, we are just back to the perennial question of where it will go.

If it reduces the Labour lead over the Tories at all, I doubt it will do so by very much. The impression from the polls is that the growth in Reform support since Farage's putsch has drawn from both Labour and the Tories.

I can imagine a lot of potential Reform voters being put-off by the "fucking appeasement of Putin", and deciding to abstain instead

That alone could save a dozen Tory seats? And when you are as close to wipe out as the Tories are, then a dozen seats is quite something

But again, it needs the Tories to be aggressive and ruthless, traits of which we have zero sign, to date

DougSeal said:

On topic, file under mildly amusing that a plurality of undecided voters were undecided on the question asked. Would hate to go to a restaurant with them.

What I found rather odd about it is that 10% of undecided voters thought it would be a good thing for the country if Labour had a very large majority, but clearly this wasn't sufficient for them to say they'd vote Labour!

Scott_xP said:

Accurate

https://x.com/BettinaSRoss1/status/1804426537405464606

In Farage I see someone who from a public platform has never uttered one word of kindness towards the fellow citizens he is not trying to recruit, never extended a conciliating hand to anyone who differs, never built a bridge or talked about compromise, and never indicated sympathy with (or even interest in) a contrary opinion, or any willingness to reconsider his own. The grin is broad but the vive is negativeL whom or what do we hate? Come hate with me.

I don't think it is quite the same thing as the extreme offensiveness and odiousness that Trump displays, where is just so vulgar and unpleasant all the time even if you agree with him on 90% of things, as Farage does have a kind of chummy, earnest kind of charismatic appeal. He can come across as pretty ordinary, despite being a professional politician for decades.

Scott_xP said:

@hugorifkind

The Farage thing isn't really about Putin. It's about what moral responsibility Farage thinks Britain has to help people in other countries enjoy what should be universal democratic freedoms. And the answer, for him, is none whatsoever. There's not even a threshold. Zero. Zilch.

It's incredibly revealing. It's also a feature of the new far right, everywhere. Not even "our people first" but "our people only". It is absolutely appeasement and alien to Western diplomatic ethics since WW2. And don't imagine it would have been any different IN WW2, either.

Isn't the point more a simpler one of capability?

Entering WW1 we were the richest and most powerful country in the world. Entering WW2, whilst damaged by WW1 to the point of no longer being the world's leading economy, still very wealthy comparitively (with the Empire to liquidate), with an economy that had recovered well during the 1930s (under very strict non-socialist policies please note), and a leader in manufacturing and military technology.

Now, we're what we are now. Nobody is more patriotic than myself here - sometimes I think I'm one of the few here who believes in our potential as an independent nation - but we are simply not in a position to fight, or even contribute meaningfully, to world conflict. We just abolished virgin steel production. We have no large scale manufacturing base. We're massively indebted with a large structural deficit. Net zero, immigration, and welfare commitments are crippling us. It's not a case of nasty people like Nigel Farage undermining our resolve, and people not being willing to work as ARP wardens or build Anderson shelters because they've been listening to nasty Nigel, it's that their "our people only" approach is literally the ONLY feasible stance we have at this time.

Stuartinromford said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Ooh, CCHQ social media team have woken up.

Two posts this morning, one going after Labour on housing taxes, and another going after Labour on motoring taxes.

Nothing at all on Farage.

https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804490205593731378?s=12
https://x.com/conservatives/status/1804450095636562228?s=12

Mad

The more I think about it, the more Farage's comments feel like a huge mistake the Tories should be exploiting. NOT because of his views on the origins of the war, but because it can be painted as proof that he is literally a paid Putinite puppet. He has appeared on Russia Today, he did so after Crimea

That will be deadly for a lot of his potential voters. That's not "deeply patriotic", is it?

I guess the Tories have to be wary of the libel laws, but they could surely chuck out some innuendo. A screenshot of him on Russia Today, his quotes about Ukraine, and just a question - "who is he working for"?

That could be brutally effective and drive down the Reform vote well under 15%, potentially saving the Tories from disaster. This is a gift. Are they going to take it?

But if he isn't a paid Putinite puppet (or if there's just no actual evidence that he is), that approach could be very dangerous. Putin is very good at getting apologies off people. CCHQ doesn't want to be in the position at having to apologise publicly to him during an election campaign.

Do you mean Putin is very good at getting apologies off people?

Enabling them to fall out of tenth storey windows is more his style, I thought.

President Putin managed to get an absolutely lovely, heartfelt apology from Prigozhin shortly before he sadly had an accident.