8 days to go and Ipsos brings no good news for the Tories – politicalbetting.com

SandyRentool said:

Benpointer said:

Apologies if this got posted earlier, interesting visualisation:

What election night might look like, based on PA's expected declaration times and the FT projection model http://ft.com/projection



https://x.com/martinstabe/status/1805882759346344132

A slight delay, and a new dawn will have broken, just as a new dawn will have broken.

TimS said:

Pulpstar said:

TimS said:

PedestrianRock said:

Benpointer said:

TimS said:

Pulpstar said:

IanB2 said:

PedestrianRock said:

stodge said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

@TSE

Nice header, but why do you/we focus on the bad polls for the Tories?

I accept that Ipsos and Survation have some pedigree, but Varian, JLP and MiC are all solid enough and members of the BPC. I appreciate that even they are not so great for the Blue team, but they do at least feed a little life into what otherwise would be the dried out corpse of the outgoing government.

The question is why are we seeing such a wide divergence (the gap between 18% and 25% is vast in statistical terms). Is it methodology, sampling, weighting, re-allocation of Don't Knows?

I pointed to a huge discrepency in the over 65 vote shares between More In Common (40% for the Conservatives) and R&W (25%).

JL Partners has 43% Conservative share among the over 65s which explains its higher Conservative VI.

I saw something on Twitter that was saying some pollsters were accounting for some of the older Tory vote dying off since 2019, and some weren’t.

Didn’t look into it too much but that could explain a lot if it differs between pollsters?

The bigger issue for the MRPs is that the census data they use to back-project their poll findings and analysis onto each constituency are often quite old.

When you look at by-election swings, the Lib Dems have mahoosively outperformed Labour (Even though Labour had some very good swings this parliament). I think the yellows could be in for a very good night indeed.

I dare not jinx it but getting my hopes up. Done that too often.

I'll be relieved if we go above 20 seats, happy if we get 25+ and delirious if we beat the SNP into 3rd place.

I worry for you when the LDs beat the Tories into 2nd.

Yes I still think this bet at 4.5 is stunning value. If tactical voting is anything like all the indications suggest it will be, the LDs should have a good shot at getting over the line.

Not a chance. Even on the MRPs which generally show worse seat numbers than UNS the Tories are generally getting comfortably over 100 seats. And there remain at least 2 or 3 percentage points of Reform left to squeeze even if the Ref vote holds up much higher than in recent local elections.

That's simply factually wrong.

The MRP average is 98 seats or just over 100 if you exclude electoral calculus. Half are over and half under 100 seats. The remainder of your statement might be true but the bit in bold is codswallop.

The ones I can see from the last few days are: Yougov (Tories on 108), Focaldata (110), Ipsos (115), Survation (72) and Savanta (52) - I'd missed Savanta but it and Survation both look like big outliers. I assume there must be others given your codswallop comment.

Sandpit said:

Is it not illegal to take a photograph of a completed ballot paper?

Mexicanpete said:

bigjohnowls said:

My daughter told me last night she might not vote Green because she doesn't want to wake up to a Tory/ Reform led Parliament.

I told her if she votes Labour she is voting for continuation Tory and will have a lot more to regret.

She sent me a photo of her PV 5 mins later.

She voted Green.

That's a really depressing post in so many ways. I wouldn't dream of interfering with my children's vote.

Shame on you BJO.

Pulpstar said:

TimS said:

Pulpstar said:

TimS said:

PedestrianRock said:

Benpointer said:

TimS said:

Pulpstar said:

IanB2 said:

PedestrianRock said:

stodge said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

@TSE

Nice header, but why do you/we focus on the bad polls for the Tories?

I accept that Ipsos and Survation have some pedigree, but Varian, JLP and MiC are all solid enough and members of the BPC. I appreciate that even they are not so great for the Blue team, but they do at least feed a little life into what otherwise would be the dried out corpse of the outgoing government.

The question is why are we seeing such a wide divergence (the gap between 18% and 25% is vast in statistical terms). Is it methodology, sampling, weighting, re-allocation of Don't Knows?

I pointed to a huge discrepency in the over 65 vote shares between More In Common (40% for the Conservatives) and R&W (25%).

JL Partners has 43% Conservative share among the over 65s which explains its higher Conservative VI.

I saw something on Twitter that was saying some pollsters were accounting for some of the older Tory vote dying off since 2019, and some weren’t.

Didn’t look into it too much but that could explain a lot if it differs between pollsters?

The bigger issue for the MRPs is that the census data they use to back-project their poll findings and analysis onto each constituency are often quite old.

When you look at by-election swings, the Lib Dems have mahoosively outperformed Labour (Even though Labour had some very good swings this parliament). I think the yellows could be in for a very good night indeed.

I dare not jinx it but getting my hopes up. Done that too often.

I'll be relieved if we go above 20 seats, happy if we get 25+ and delirious if we beat the SNP into 3rd place.

I worry for you when the LDs beat the Tories into 2nd.

Yes I still think this bet at 4.5 is stunning value. If tactical voting is anything like all the indications suggest it will be, the LDs should have a good shot at getting over the line.

Not a chance. Even on the MRPs which generally show worse seat numbers than UNS the Tories are generally getting comfortably over 100 seats. And there remain at least 2 or 3 percentage points of Reform left to squeeze even if the Ref vote holds up much higher than in recent local elections.

That's simply factually wrong.

The MRP average is 98 seats or just over 100 if you exclude electoral calculus. Half are over and half under 100 seats. The remainder of your statement might be true but the bit in bold is codswallop.

The ones I can see from the last few days are: Yougov (Tories on 108), Focaldata (110), Ipsos (115), Survation (72) and Savanta (52) - I'd missed Savanta but it and Survation both look like big outliers. I assume there must be others given your codswallop comment.

Electoral Calculus 75
New Statesman 96
More in Common 155

BartholomewRoberts said:

williamglenn said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

williamglenn said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

LostPassword said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Eabhal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Eabhal said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.

Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.

Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.

Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.

You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.

As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.

So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?

No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.

Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.

The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.

Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.

While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?

No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.

They can care, bitch and moan all they please.

But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.

Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.

There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.

Why is there?

If its their own land, what difference is there?

You're taking the "someone's freedom to swing their fist stops where my nose begins" argument to the extreme where they are forced to tolerate being surrounded by antisocial behaviour. It's a profoundly unconservative position.

You're right, its a profoundly liberal position.

I've always said I'm more of a liberal than a conservative.

Nobody is forced to tolerate being surrounded by antisocial behaviour. If people are doing anything illegal, that should be stopped. If people don't like their neighbours doing entirely legal actions, they are the antisocial ones and can move if they please.

LostPassword said:

Sandpit said:

Is it not illegal to take a photograph of a completed ballot paper?

It is, yes. It's to protect people from being forced to vote in a certain way.

MarqueeMark said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I wonder what first attracted this chap to Nigel Farage?

Reform candidate Leslie Lilley said he would ‘slaughter migrants’

The 70-year-old conspiracy theorist who is likely to reap 20 per cent of the vote in Southend East & Rochford is Facebook friends with the fascist leader Gary Raikes

A Reform candidate said he would “slaughter” migrants arriving on small boats and “have their family taken out”.

Leslie Lilley, who is set to win almost 20 per cent of the vote in the Labour battleground seat of Southend East & Rochford, made the threats on the official Facebook account he uses to run his local campaign.

In a post in June 2020, Lilley reacted to the news of a small boat arriving in Dover saying: “I hope I’m near one of these scumbags one day I won’t run away I’ll slaughter them then have their family taken out.”

The same month, Lilley, now 70, railed against “more scum entering the UK”, adding “I hope your family get Robbed, Beaten or attacked”.

He also suggested Border Force vessels should have razor wire to tear small boats carrying migrants across the Channel, and commented “gas” along with several laughing emojis under a video of Muslims praying.

Lilley, who has also argued that the pandemic was a plan to “depopulate the world” and was “mass murder by government”, is one of the 41 Reform UK candidates who are “friends” on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the fascist leader.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/reform-candidate-leslie-lilley-said-he-would-slaughter-migrants-d7rl2dgt6

Proponents of PR - how many of these delightful folk* are you prepared to have holding the balance of power?

*aka low-life fuckers...

Pulpstar said:

TimS said:

Pulpstar said:

TimS said:

PedestrianRock said:

Benpointer said:

TimS said:

Pulpstar said:

IanB2 said:

PedestrianRock said:

stodge said:

Peter_the_Punter said:

@TSE

Nice header, but why do you/we focus on the bad polls for the Tories?

I accept that Ipsos and Survation have some pedigree, but Varian, JLP and MiC are all solid enough and members of the BPC. I appreciate that even they are not so great for the Blue team, but they do at least feed a little life into what otherwise would be the dried out corpse of the outgoing government.

The question is why are we seeing such a wide divergence (the gap between 18% and 25% is vast in statistical terms). Is it methodology, sampling, weighting, re-allocation of Don't Knows?

I pointed to a huge discrepency in the over 65 vote shares between More In Common (40% for the Conservatives) and R&W (25%).

JL Partners has 43% Conservative share among the over 65s which explains its higher Conservative VI.

I saw something on Twitter that was saying some pollsters were accounting for some of the older Tory vote dying off since 2019, and some weren’t.

Didn’t look into it too much but that could explain a lot if it differs between pollsters?

The bigger issue for the MRPs is that the census data they use to back-project their poll findings and analysis onto each constituency are often quite old.

When you look at by-election swings, the Lib Dems have mahoosively outperformed Labour (Even though Labour had some very good swings this parliament). I think the yellows could be in for a very good night indeed.

I dare not jinx it but getting my hopes up. Done that too often.

I'll be relieved if we go above 20 seats, happy if we get 25+ and delirious if we beat the SNP into 3rd place.

I worry for you when the LDs beat the Tories into 2nd.

Yes I still think this bet at 4.5 is stunning value. If tactical voting is anything like all the indications suggest it will be, the LDs should have a good shot at getting over the line.

Not a chance. Even on the MRPs which generally show worse seat numbers than UNS the Tories are generally getting comfortably over 100 seats. And there remain at least 2 or 3 percentage points of Reform left to squeeze even if the Ref vote holds up much higher than in recent local elections.

That's simply factually wrong.

The MRP average is 98 seats or just over 100 if you exclude electoral calculus. Half are over and half under 100 seats. The remainder of your statement might be true but the bit in bold is codswallop.

The ones I can see from the last few days are: Yougov (Tories on 108), Focaldata (110), Ipsos (115), Survation (72) and Savanta (52) - I'd missed Savanta but it and Survation both look like big outliers. I assume there must be others given your codswallop comment.

Electoral Calculus 75
New Statesman 96
More in Common 155

LostPassword said:

Pop

BartholomewRoberts said:

williamglenn said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

LostPassword said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Eabhal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Eabhal said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.

Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.

Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.

Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.

You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.

As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.

So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?

No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.

Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.

The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.

Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.

While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?

No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.

They can care, bitch and moan all they please.

But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.

Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.

There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.

Why is there?

If its their own land, what difference is there?

Do you oppose restrictions on noise pollution?

Cookie said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

FPT

Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.

It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.

The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.

@Leon suffers the same delusion.

I'm not sure you're exactly right Ben.

When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction.
Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]

I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.

I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.

Benpointer said:

bigjohnowls said:

LostPassword said:

Sandpit said:

Is it not illegal to take a photograph of a completed ballot paper?

It is, yes. It's to protect people from being forced to vote in a certain way.

No it's not. Law changed

No. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/section/66 Paragraph 3B

viewcode said:

Carnyx said:

TOPPING said:

While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.

It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.

The following is a quote from the Guardian entry on its election page. The entry is here: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jun/26/uk-general-election-live-updates-tories-labour-betting-scandal?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with:block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855#block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855

"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.

Tennant said in his acceptance speech:

"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”

In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:

"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”

Chris said:

viewcode said:

Carnyx said:

TOPPING said:

While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.

It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.

The following is a quote from the Guardian entry on its election page. The entry is here: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jun/26/uk-general-election-live-updates-tories-labour-betting-scandal?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with:block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855#block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855

"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.

Tennant said in his acceptance speech:

"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”

In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:

"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”

"calling publicly for my existence to end".

Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.

Cookie said:

Anyway, on thread: the value in those spreads is surely buying Labour. They're not going to do much worse than that and they could do considerably better. I don't think it unreasonable that they'll get 500; I do think it implausible that they'll get as low as 350. A definite buy.
Sell Tories also strikes me as good value; while they could go as low as 50, they're surely not going to go as high as 200.

Mexicanpete said:

bigjohnowls said:

Sandpit said:

Is it not illegal to take a photograph of a completed ballot paper?

Not any more unless you are in a Polling Station

Mexicanpete said:

bigjohnowls said:

My daughter told me last night she might not vote Green because she doesn't want to wake up to a Tory/ Reform led Parliament.

I told her if she votes Labour she is voting for continuation Tory and will have a lot more to regret.

She sent me a photo of her PV 5 mins later.

She voted Green.

That's a really depressing post in so many ways. I wouldn't dream of interfering with my children's vote.

Shame on you BJO.

She wanted to vote Green but was scared of the (0.00001%) chance of Reform holding the balance of power.

She was asking advice as to how likely that was and as a neutral on the SKS fan front it was only right she was aware of the consequences of voting for the continuation Tory Red team in respect of NHS reform austerity etc.

But you haven't told her the truth, you have given her your interpretation as fact. How will you explain away Deputy Prime Minister Farage?

Very old school Labour, very old school controlling behaviour/ misogyny.

BartholomewRoberts said:

LostPassword said:

Pop

BartholomewRoberts said:

williamglenn said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

LostPassword said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Eabhal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Eabhal said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.

Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.

Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.

Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.

You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.

As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.

So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?

No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.

Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.

The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.

Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.

While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?

No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.

They can care, bitch and moan all they please.

But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.

Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.

There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.

Why is there?

If its their own land, what difference is there?

Do you oppose restrictions on noise pollution?

I think there should be legal restriction on noise and other pollution in land zoned for residential housing, and so long as whatever you're planning doesn't violate those noise or any other restrictions it should be perfectly legal.

If it does, there ought to be consequences, but you don't need NIMBYs or planning to deal with that.

BartholomewRoberts said:

LostPassword said:

Pop

BartholomewRoberts said:

williamglenn said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Nigelb said:

LostPassword said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Eabhal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Eabhal said:

BatteryCorrectHorse said:

Phone masts in urban areas should not have restrictions.

Sorry to make this point again but planning has come up and it's my area.

Yes, they should. You don't want them plonked in the middle of a school playing field, the flight path of an airport, or in a cemetery.

Come on. This anti-NIMBY stuff is starting to get a bit silly.

You don't need planning to deal with the former or the latter, the owners of the field or cemetery should determine what is appropriate with their own land. No need for NIMBYs to stick their oars in.

As for flight paths, flight safety is already dealt with separately under specific regulations, again no need for nosy neighbours to get involved.

So it's only the regulations that you personally don't like that should be ignored?

No, regulations should be set by the law, debated in Parliament.

Then people should be free to liberally do whatever they please within the law, without their neighbours having a say.

The origins of our legal system lie in creating a more peaceful way to resolve disputes than violent blood feuds. In a similar way, our planning system has to accommodate the reality that most people do care about what their neighbours do with their land.

Having some rules, and a process, around it helps to ameliorate frustration and bad feeling, and reduces the likelihood of a dispute leading to violence.

While I can respect that you hold this idealistic position that posits they people shouldn't care, do you not acknowledge the value of a planning system to deal with the reality that people do care?

No, Barty doesn't recognise their right to care.

They can care, bitch and moan all they please.

But if what is being developed is legal and by consenting adults on their own land it should be allowed and objections should have no say at all.

Just as if people object to a gay couple, or interracial couple, they should be allowed to care but not have the right to get involved and object to what consenting adults do on their own land.

There's a difference between what people do as an activity and what they do to change the environment.

Why is there?

If its their own land, what difference is there?

Do you oppose restrictions on noise pollution?

I think there should be legal restriction on noise and other pollution in land zoned for residential housing, and so long as whatever you're planning doesn't violate those noise or any other restrictions it should be perfectly legal.

If it does, there ought to be consequences, but you don't need NIMBYs or planning to deal with that.

Grandcanyon said:

Benpointer said:

Cookie said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

FPT

Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.

It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.

The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.

@Leon suffers the same delusion.

I'm not sure you're exactly right Ben.

When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction.
Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]

I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.

I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.

Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.

Its not about supporting Putin though is it. Its whether you support the policy towards the ukraine war which at present seems to be providing endless weapons so more people can be slaughtered or whether you give peace a chance.

Sandpit said:

biggles said:

Pulpstar said:

Broxbourne and Basildon/Billericay are the first big tests of the models

EC Broxbourne 0.3 Con
YG Broxbourne 1% Lab
NS Broxbourne 2.4% Lab
IPSOS Broxbourne 1% Con
SAVANTA Broxbourne 4.97% Lab
FOCALDATA Broxbourne 2.0% Con
More in Common Broxbourne 6.50% Con
Survation Broxbourne 1.73% Con

Same MRPs/models

Basildon and Billericay 2.4 Lab
Basildon and Billericay 2% Rfm
Basildon and Billericay 0.4% Con
Basildon and Billericay 5% Lab
Basildon and Billericay 6.89% Lab
Basildon and Billericay 8.3% Con
Basildon and Billericay 8.80% Con
Basildon and Billericay 1.89% Lab

Thank you, and you everyone else doing these spreadsheets.There’s going to be money made on here again isn’t there?

If a lot of us do well, a donate button for the site feels overdue, but also maybe a way to buy a notional beer for the various spreadsheet builders.

@Andy_JS did a spreadsheet for the 2016 referendum, that made many of us here a lot of money. If we should ever meet, he will leave very drunk and not having bought a single drink. 🍻

Sandpit said:

mickydroy said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I wonder what first attracted this chap to Nigel Farage?

Reform candidate Leslie Lilley said he would ‘slaughter migrants’

The 70-year-old conspiracy theorist who is likely to reap 20 per cent of the vote in Southend East & Rochford is Facebook friends with the fascist leader Gary Raikes

A Reform candidate said he would “slaughter” migrants arriving on small boats and “have their family taken out”.

Leslie Lilley, who is set to win almost 20 per cent of the vote in the Labour battleground seat of Southend East & Rochford, made the threats on the official Facebook account he uses to run his local campaign.

In a post in June 2020, Lilley reacted to the news of a small boat arriving in Dover saying: “I hope I’m near one of these scumbags one day I won’t run away I’ll slaughter them then have their family taken out.”

The same month, Lilley, now 70, railed against “more scum entering the UK”, adding “I hope your family get Robbed, Beaten or attacked”.

He also suggested Border Force vessels should have razor wire to tear small boats carrying migrants across the Channel, and commented “gas” along with several laughing emojis under a video of Muslims praying.

Lilley, who has also argued that the pandemic was a plan to “depopulate the world” and was “mass murder by government”, is one of the 41 Reform UK candidates who are “friends” on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the fascist leader.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/reform-candidate-leslie-lilley-said-he-would-slaughter-migrants-d7rl2dgt6

They did no vetting at all, did they?

I seriously think I’m going to set up a UK political vetting company.

I am really worried about this Country, worried about the amount of people who are willing to vote for Farage's bunch of crackpots and racists, even after hearing views like this, and particularly worried about 2029, when Farage and his like could be very near the levers of power, I really hope the Tory party gets it act in gear, and as Big G said, become a one nation conservative party again, but I fear the worst

The only way that the like of Farage (and a whole lot worse) get defeated, is for the more mainsteam parties to actually listen to what their supporters are saying, and materially make their life better. Many of those voting for Farage feel they have no mainstream voice supporting them.

I’m reminded of the famous Michael Moore video from 2016, where he explains to a coastal liberal audience why people in ‘left-behind’ communities are voting for Trump in huge numbers. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vMm5HfxNXY4

ToryJim said:

The WeThink MRP has some odd results. Not sure I buy that Reform are going to take Newark or one of the IOW seats as well as others but Farage fails by 14% points and Tice loses as does 30p Lee. I mean it would be hilarious but I just don’t buy it.

TheScreamingEagles said:

New MRP, see the Twitter thread

🦕 Here is our @TheEconomist @wethinkpolling MRP!

And @JamesFransham has updated our Britain prediction model methodology.

This is how we're thinking about the election (with maps + charts!) 🧵

Today, we have published our MRP with @wethinkpolling
:

Lab 465 (+263)
Con 76 (-289)
LDem 52 (+41)
SNP 29 (-19)
Reform 3 (+3)
Green 3 (+2)
PC 3 (-1)

@TheEconomist
/
@wethinkpolling

N=18595
30th May - 21st June

https://x.com/OwenWntr/status/1805977883447287832

TheScreamingEagles said:

New MRP, see the Twitter thread

🦕 Here is our @TheEconomist @wethinkpolling MRP!

And @JamesFransham has updated our Britain prediction model methodology.

This is how we're thinking about the election (with maps + charts!) 🧵

Today, we have published our MRP with @wethinkpolling
:

Lab 465 (+263)
Con 76 (-289)
LDem 52 (+41)
SNP 29 (-19)
Reform 3 (+3)
Green 3 (+2)
PC 3 (-1)

@TheEconomist
/
@wethinkpolling

N=18595
30th May - 21st June

https://x.com/OwenWntr/status/1805977883447287832

Grandcanyon said:

Dodgy source but still.

Just in🔥

Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.

This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.

Buckle up!

https://x.com/UnityNewsNet/status/1805977955316678692

Grandcanyon said:

Im going to call it. Today is the happiest day of the year.
Good weather
England still in major football tournament
Anticipation of Tory rout next week

The weather is due to break later this week and England are then due to make their usual tame exit.

bondegezou said:

ToryJim said:

The WeThink MRP has some odd results. Not sure I buy that Reform are going to take Newark or one of the IOW seats as well as others but Farage fails by 14% points and Tice loses as does 30p Lee. I mean it would be hilarious but I just don’t buy it.

Yes. MRPs are bad at hyper local circumstances.

dixiedean said:

bondegezou said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The Ann Summers Theatre of Dreams

EXCLUSIVE

🚨 Manchester United considering selling naming rights to Old Trafford as they seek to drive up revenues as part of Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s plans to refurbish Old Trafford or build a new stadium. Ticket price increases also under consideration.

https://x.com/AdamCrafton_/status/1805932992675643541

I believe Ann Summers sold her rights to the name “Ann Summers” not long after the company was founded. (My Dad knew her.)

Buffy the Vampire Slayer was, of course, Elizabeth Ann Summers.
One of Josh Whedon's little nods to his time spent growing up over here.

Andy_JS said:

"Britain | Our best guess

The Economist’s final prediction points to a Tory wipeout in Britain

Opposition parties are inflicting damage on the Conservatives from all directions"

https://www.economist.com/britain/2024/06/26/the-economists-final-prediction-points-to-a-tory-wipeout-in-britain

Shares are Lab 42%, Con 22%, Ref 14%, LD 11%, Grn 6%.

DeclanF said:

Chris said:

viewcode said:

Carnyx said:

TOPPING said:

While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.

It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.

The following is a quote from the Guardian entry on its election page. The entry is here: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jun/26/uk-general-election-live-updates-tories-labour-betting-scandal?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with:block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855#block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855

"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.

Tennant said in his acceptance speech:

"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”

In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:

"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”

"calling publicly for my existence to end".

Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.

>everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else

See the bit in bold. That's the point which this very male-dominated forum keeps on missing. Men who go into women's changing rooms and act as voyeurs (voyeurism is a crime, btw) making women feel uncomfortable and distressed - see the case of the nurses in Darlington - are not living their lives without hurting others.

They want to live their lives as they want regardless of whether or not they hurt others. In some cases, hurting women seems to be the aim. Why else would young masked men gather to shout abuse at women or hold up placards threatening violence against them.

That's the point which is missed and which, when raised on here or elsewhere, gets abuse or contemptuous dismissal, such as being told to shut up.

wooliedyed said:

The express (lol) say Yvette is in panic mode in Castleford

Beibheirli_C said:

Cookie said:

Benpointer said:

Cookie said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

FPT

Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.

It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.

The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.

@Leon suffers the same delusion.

I'm not sure you're exactly right Ben.

When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction.
Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]

I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.

I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.

Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.

Fair enough.
I must admit, I've been rather taken aback by the Putin stuff. I knew Nigel was not entirely trustworthy on Ukraine - but I thought he'd at least try to come across as such. And I'm quite staggered there are quite so many out and out Putinistas among Reform candidates. I'm slightly surprised there are that many Putinistas in the country.

I think Sandpit's right on Nigel - he's spent too much time in America and is looking through the wrong Overton window - but I'm surprised at the rest of them. Not that there are cranks in Reform (or indeed any other party) - but that their crankery is so consistent.
I'd be interested to know if the Greens are the same.

I am amazed that anybody could be fooled by Farage, but I guess Brexit should have taught me my lesson.

I always knew that Boris, Truss and Raaaaaaab were vacuous idiots (as I repeatedly said on here for years), but to me it has always been obvious that Farage was primarily interested in promoting himself (like Trump). His face on Brexit night when he realised that he had killed his own Euro-gravy train was the only heart warming moment of the evening.

Starmer does not worry me in the same way that the Tory chancers and wide-boys did. I think he will do his best for the country, but I do worry that he is more of a manager than a leader. I hope he has the vision and drive necessary to improve things.

DeclanF said:

Chris said:

viewcode said:

Carnyx said:

TOPPING said:

While the Graun includes the Badenoch/Tennant spat deep in its rolling coverage, there is no mention at all of it, still less any story on its election website front page.

It's on their main election news feed, and has been for mcuh of today. There is only so much space on the page itself.

The following is a quote from the Guardian entry on its election page. The entry is here: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jun/26/uk-general-election-live-updates-tories-labour-betting-scandal?CMP=share_btn_url&page=with:block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855#block-667bd0b68f0839bc2f003855

"...The PA news agency have a bit more detail on the comments from David Tennant and Kemi Badenoch. Tennant won a prize for being a “celebrity ally” at the British LGBT awards last week and used his speech to target the equalities minister. Badenoch has faced criticism over her approach to trans rights.

Tennant said in his acceptance speech:

"...If I’m honest I’m a little depressed by the fact that acknowledging that everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else should merit any kind of special award or special mention, because it’s common sense, isn’t it? It is human decency. We shouldn’t live in a world where that is worth remarking on. However, until we wake up and Kemi Badenoch doesn’t exist any more – I don’t wish ill of her, I just wish her to shut up – whilst we do live in this world, I am honoured to receive this...”

In response to Tennant’s comments, Badenoch said:

"...I will not shut up. I will not be silenced by men who prioritise applause from Stonewall over the safety of women and girls. A rich, lefty, white male celebrity so blinded by ideology he can’t see the optics of attacking the only black woman in government by calling publicly for my existence to end. Tennant is one of Labour’s celebrity supporters. This is an early example of what life will be like if they win. Keir Starmer stood by while Rosie Duffield was hounded. He and his supporters will do the same with the country. Do not let the bigots and bullies win...”

"calling publicly for my existence to end".

Kemi Badenoch seems to have reckoned without the fact that we can read.

>everyone has the right to be who they want to be and live their life how they want to live it as long as they’re not hurting anyone else

See the bit in bold. That's the point which this very male-dominated forum keeps on missing. Men who go into women's changing rooms and act as voyeurs (voyeurism is a crime, btw) making women feel uncomfortable and distressed - see the case of the nurses in Darlington - are not living their lives without hurting others.

They want to live their lives as they want regardless of whether or not they hurt others. In some cases, hurting women seems to be the aim. Why else would young masked men gather to shout abuse at women or hold up placards threatening violence against them.

That's the point which is missed and which, when raised on here or elsewhere, gets abuse or contemptuous dismissal, such as being told to shut up.

Andy_JS said:

"A Liberal Democrat candidate apologised for apparently joking that a woman with a Liverpool accent was in the area "nicking stuff".

Lisa Smart, who is standing in the Stockport constituency of Hazel Grove, was recorded on a doorbell camera making the quip while out canvassing.

Ms Smart made the comment to a woman with a Liverpool accent who answered a door but explained it was not her house.

The local Labour and Conservative candidates condemned the comment as a "casual slur" and a "derogatory stereotype"."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd11xprd6ryo

MarqueeMark said:

Cookie said:

Grandcanyon said:

Dodgy source but still.

Just in🔥

Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.

This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.

Buckle up!

https://x.com/UnityNewsNet/status/1805977955316678692

Oh no - here comes North Korea with all its might and resources! Run for the hills!

Putin's thinking is presumably that North Korea has more bullet magnets than Ukraine has bullets.

Grandcanyon said:

Benpointer said:

Cookie said:

Benpointer said:

FrankBooth said:

FPT

Goodwin thinks Reform may have been damaged by Farage's Ukraine comments which is significant coming from him.

It does play into the idea that Farage is most comfortable hanging around with the bad boys.

The Rest is Politics summed it up well this week: Farage and his ilk believe their own bullshit and assume everybody else does too deep down but most are too cowed to admit it. Whereas in reality these (e,g, Putin is right) are distinctly minority views.

@Leon suffers the same delusion.

I'm not sure you're exactly right Ben.

When Reform or one of Farage's other vehicles arrive, they do so with ideas that often have quite wide support. Immigration is the obvious example: the median position in the voting public is closer to Reform's than it is to anyone else. Much of their manifesto was (I understand - I haven't read it) unremarkable right wingery. Possibly you could question the sums, but that's true of all small parties. They're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're certainly not minority views. It's not unreasonable of Reform to assume their views have traction.
Where they've then gone wrong is possibly by assuming that because some of their views have traction (Reform: there is too much immigration; the government should tackle this; right-hand half of UK electorate: Yes, Reform, you're right.) that ALL of their views will (Reform: Oh, and Putin's actually a really lovely guy; right-hand half of UK electorate: er, what? [edges away quietly)]

I'm sure I'm not the only one to have had the experience of a conversation with a friendly stranger in a pub where a couple of uncontroversial opinions have been followed up by some absolute insanity. This feels like that.

I'm sure plenty will still vote Reform out of sheer rage. But I think even among those that do support for Putin will be a distinctly minority position.

Well yes, I was referring to the 'Putin is right' idea as an example. I agree some of their ideas have more support and thus traction.

Its not about supporting Putin though is it. Its whether you support the policy towards the ukraine war which at present seems to be providing endless weapons so more people can be slaughtered or whether you give peace a chance.

TimS said:

numbertwelve said:

Sandpit said:

mickydroy said:

Sandpit said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I wonder what first attracted this chap to Nigel Farage?

Reform candidate Leslie Lilley said he would ‘slaughter migrants’

The 70-year-old conspiracy theorist who is likely to reap 20 per cent of the vote in Southend East & Rochford is Facebook friends with the fascist leader Gary Raikes

A Reform candidate said he would “slaughter” migrants arriving on small boats and “have their family taken out”.

Leslie Lilley, who is set to win almost 20 per cent of the vote in the Labour battleground seat of Southend East & Rochford, made the threats on the official Facebook account he uses to run his local campaign.

In a post in June 2020, Lilley reacted to the news of a small boat arriving in Dover saying: “I hope I’m near one of these scumbags one day I won’t run away I’ll slaughter them then have their family taken out.”

The same month, Lilley, now 70, railed against “more scum entering the UK”, adding “I hope your family get Robbed, Beaten or attacked”.

He also suggested Border Force vessels should have razor wire to tear small boats carrying migrants across the Channel, and commented “gas” along with several laughing emojis under a video of Muslims praying.

Lilley, who has also argued that the pandemic was a plan to “depopulate the world” and was “mass murder by government”, is one of the 41 Reform UK candidates who are “friends” on Facebook with Gary Raikes, the fascist leader.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/reform-candidate-leslie-lilley-said-he-would-slaughter-migrants-d7rl2dgt6

They did no vetting at all, did they?

I seriously think I’m going to set up a UK political vetting company.

I am really worried about this Country, worried about the amount of people who are willing to vote for Farage's bunch of crackpots and racists, even after hearing views like this, and particularly worried about 2029, when Farage and his like could be very near the levers of power, I really hope the Tory party gets it act in gear, and as Big G said, become a one nation conservative party again, but I fear the worst

The only way that the like of Farage (and a whole lot worse) get defeated, is for the more mainsteam parties to actually listen to what their supporters are saying, and materially make their life better. Many of those voting for Farage feel they have no mainstream voice supporting them.

I’m reminded of the famous Michael Moore video from 2016, where he explains to a coastal liberal audience why people in ‘left-behind’ communities are voting for Trump in huge numbers. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vMm5HfxNXY4

This is so so so important to stress.

I read some posts on here with slight bemusement. It is as if Brexit never happened, as if those voters went away somewhere or their sense of frustration and disillusionment was magically fixed by the Tories setting themselves up for defeat.

This isn’t going away. And I will continue to bang the drum on here and elsewhere. I don’t want a populist right government. I want sensible, competent government that listens to its people, is willing to have the difficult conversations around things the establishment classes would rather we didn’t talk about, and embraces the need for (small r) reform of the way our society works.

If these voters and communities continue to be ignored then we will get chancers like Farage in power within about a decade.

People interpret that instruction to listen to left behind communities and make their lives better in two different ways, and I think there's an important distinction to make.

Making their lives better: yes, absolutely, and because neither the populist right nor the traditional free market liberals and their left of centre counterparts have known how to do that, the despondency has remained.

Echoing their rhetoric with more rhetoric or with policies that might superficially appeal to them but are economically damaging to their interests: no, that's exactly what the Tories have done and it makes things worse.

eek said:

NickyBreakspear said:

wooliedyed said:

The express (lol) say Yvette is in panic mode in Castleford

She might become Home Secretary?

In a seat that the Tories didn't win in 2019 - not a chance Reform are within 15,000 votes...

Grandcanyon said:

Cookie said:

Grandcanyon said:

Dodgy source but still.

Just in🔥

Unconfirmed as yet but numerous sources stating North Korean troops will officially be sent to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian troops in the zone of the SMO.

This comes after they signed strategic partnership treaty deepening military cooperation.

Buckle up!

https://x.com/UnityNewsNet/status/1805977955316678692

Oh no - here comes North Korea with all its might and resources! Run for the hills!

North Korea regular army 950,000 active personnel compared to 75,000 for British army
Also 420,000 reserve personnel.