Will Reform have at least 10 MPs when the next election is called? – politicalbetting.com
Ladbrokes have a market up on will Reform have 10 or more MPs at the time the next election is called, the time value of money alone makes this a poor bet (and the fact the other side of the bet isn’t offered).
If you thought Hegseth's stupid behaviour was bad before there are more details now.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had the Signal app installed on an office computer because he couldn’t get cell phone service in the Pentagon, according to a report.
Hegseth directed the installation of the encrypted app on a desktop Pentagon computer as a “work-around that enabled him to use Signal in a classified space,” the Washington Post reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The embattled former Fox News host discussed with aides how the app could enable them to coordinate more quickly with White House officials because of the Pentagon’s lack of cell phone service, according to the Post.
Constituency map (NI omitted) Plugging those numbers into StatsForLeftie's model yields this:
Points to note
Reform majority of around 100
LibDems as official opposition at 81 seats
Con in third at 58
SNP in fourth at 44
Lab in fifth at 41
Greens in sixth at 16.
ÿ
Good afternoon
The question is who will be the first to go below 20% or even both conservative and labour in due course
I would loathe such an outcome, but my "go-on-press-the-red-button" bad angel wants to see it on election night, at least before packing my bags and heading for the coast. It would be an amazing sight.
I hope Badenoch is given time as Con leader, I want her to do well. A Con/Ref coalition would be better than Reform winning I think, even for Reform voters. Can you imagine how the civil service would treat Reform on their own? And the lack of experience of even being an MP for what would be the cabinet would be really odd. Although maybe that is the shake up people would want, if enough voted Reform for them to win
I hope Badenoch is given time as Con leader, I want her to do well. A Con/Ref coalition would be better than Reform winning I think, even for Reform voters. Can you imagine how the civil service would treat Reform on their own? And the lack of experience of even being an MP for what would be the cabinet would be really odd. Although maybe that is the shake up people would want, if enough voted Reform for them to win
I think Kemi will still be there at the next election as the Tories would be crazy to continue the merry-go-round of leaders that so infuriated the public when they were office...
What happens at the election is another matter but I think it'll be Kemi that leads them into the election.
Interesting header, the number of by-elections per full parliament is usually in the high teens, might be a little less because the 2024 intake is so large but even the 1997-2001 Parliament had 17 by-elections. Reform are interesting because they are competitive everythere, so there's not going to be many seats that are out of reach on a by-election swing. So it's completely reasonable that Reform can win enough by-elections (and maybe a defection or two) to get to 10 seats by the end of the parliament, if Farage doesn't fall out with many more MPs.
But yep, it's locking your money away for 50% sometime in 2029. Not appealing even if the bet is.
I hope Badenoch is given time as Con leader, I want her to do well. A Con/Ref coalition would be better than Reform winning I think, even for Reform voters. Can you imagine how the civil service would treat Reform on their own? And the lack of experience of even being an MP for what would be the cabinet would be really odd. Although maybe that is the shake up people would want, if enough voted Reform for them to win
That hung Parliament/Con largest Party/Con/Ref coalition at 11-4 has to be one of the worst bets ever. It needs 3 (admittedly not entirely independent) events to happen. At least 2 being odds against. It's effectively a treble. I'd need double figures with the time of tying up money
Just caught up with the news and for once it's pretty inspiring.
"Vladimir, STOP!"
What a rebuke to all those cynics (including me) who had written off Donald Trump, thought he could never rise to the demands of his exalted office. This, I predict, will join "Ich bin ein Berliner" and "Mister Gorbachev, tear down this wall" in the annals of great presidential 'moments'.
Shades of the Cuban missile crisis as we (and the world) await the Russian leader's response.
I hope Badenoch is given time as Con leader, I want her to do well. A Con/Ref coalition would be better than Reform winning I think, even for Reform voters. Can you imagine how the civil service would treat Reform on their own? And the lack of experience of even being an MP for what would be the cabinet would be really odd. Although maybe that is the shake up people would want, if enough voted Reform for them to win
Make Rosie Duffield Opposition Minister for Women !!!!!
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
If you thought Hegseth's stupid behaviour was bad before there are more details now.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had the Signal app installed on an office computer because he couldn’t get cell phone service in the Pentagon, according to a report.
Hegseth directed the installation of the encrypted app on a desktop Pentagon computer as a “work-around that enabled him to use Signal in a classified space,” the Washington Post reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The embattled former Fox News host discussed with aides how the app could enable them to coordinate more quickly with White House officials because of the Pentagon’s lack of cell phone service, according to the Post.
Don’t they have phones for that? Secure, encrypted phones I would imagine.
I suspect the real reason these guys want to use Signal is so that they can drop all their comms into the void never to be seen again after each event so they can’t be used against them in the future. They want to be able to discuss & plan outright illegal things & never be held accountable for them.
On the recent discussion of the rights and wrongs of criticising the judiciary, this is quite an interesting precedent. In this my sympathies are (FWIW) entirely with Charlotte Proudman
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/24/why-do-they-dislike-me-so-much-the-trials-trolls-and-triumphs-of-britains-most-divisive-barrister ...In 2022 she typed a 14-part Twitter thread expressing frustration about a judgment by Sir Jonathan Cohen – who, like a handful of judges and dozens of senior barristers, was a member of the then men-only Garrick Club. Proudman felt the judgment had not taken the allegations of domestic abuse sufficiently seriously; she wrote that she was troubled by Cohen referring to the relationship between a woman and her ex-husband, who was a part-time judge and barrister, as “tempestuous” and describing the alleged domestic violence as “reckless”. She wrote that the case had “echoes of the ‘boys’ club’ which still exists among men in powerful positions”.
The Bar Standards Board responded by launching disciplinary proceedings, on the grounds that the thread “inaccurately reflected the finding of a judge on a case in which she was instructed”, and that Proudman had behaved in a way “which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public placed in her and in the profession”. She faced a 12-month suspension and £50,000 fine, but in December, after three years, all charges against her were dropped and the case was dismissed. The panel ruled that her tweets were protected under freedom of expression rules, and that they did not “gravely damage” the judiciary.
She has since launched proceedings against the Bar Standards Board. “Frankly, I’d like an apology and a sum of money to reflect the pain and distress that I’ve been put through,” she says. She would also like to understand why her male colleagues who abused her online have not been subject to similar proceedings.
Constituency map (NI omitted) Plugging those numbers into StatsForLeftie's model yields this:
Points to note
Reform majority of around 100
LibDems as official opposition at 81 seats
Con in third at 58
SNP in fourth at 44
Lab in fifth at 41
Greens in sixth at 16.
ÿ
Good afternoon
The question is who will be the first to go below 20% or even both conservative and labour in due course
I would loathe such an outcome, but my "go-on-press-the-red-button" bad angel wants to see it on election night, at least before packing my bags and heading for the coast. It would be an amazing sight.
It would. It'd mean a Reform majority. A full force earthquake, that would be, and for me about as welcome.
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
As a matter of interest what has Starmer done today to upset you ?
Don't know what's going on with the Conservative ad messaging but I'm getting loads of "Labour's council tax" messages and yet my county council is Tory run, went up ~5% and is the amongst the most expensive in the country - more expensive than the next house just over a mile north or the next village west.
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
Constituency map (NI omitted) Plugging those numbers into StatsForLeftie's model yields this:
Points to note
Reform majority of around 100
LibDems as official opposition at 81 seats
Con in third at 58
SNP in fourth at 44
Lab in fifth at 41
Greens in sixth at 16.
Interesting commentary on FPTP that on your protections the Uniparty (C/L/LD) gets around twice as many votes as Reform, and also about half as many MPs.
On the recent discussion of the rights and wrongs of criticising the judiciary, this is quite an interesting precedent. In this my sympathies are (FWIW) entirely with Charlotte Proudman
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/24/why-do-they-dislike-me-so-much-the-trials-trolls-and-triumphs-of-britains-most-divisive-barrister ...In 2022 she typed a 14-part Twitter thread expressing frustration about a judgment by Sir Jonathan Cohen – who, like a handful of judges and dozens of senior barristers, was a member of the then men-only Garrick Club. Proudman felt the judgment had not taken the allegations of domestic abuse sufficiently seriously; she wrote that she was troubled by Cohen referring to the relationship between a woman and her ex-husband, who was a part-time judge and barrister, as “tempestuous” and describing the alleged domestic violence as “reckless”. She wrote that the case had “echoes of the ‘boys’ club’ which still exists among men in powerful positions”.
The Bar Standards Board responded by launching disciplinary proceedings, on the grounds that the thread “inaccurately reflected the finding of a judge on a case in which she was instructed”, and that Proudman had behaved in a way “which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public placed in her and in the profession”. She faced a 12-month suspension and £50,000 fine, but in December, after three years, all charges against her were dropped and the case was dismissed. The panel ruled that her tweets were protected under freedom of expression rules, and that they did not “gravely damage” the judiciary.
She has since launched proceedings against the Bar Standards Board. “Frankly, I’d like an apology and a sum of money to reflect the pain and distress that I’ve been put through,” she says. She would also like to understand why her male colleagues who abused her online have not been subject to similar proceedings.
I think there are intemperate forms of campaigning that are completely counter-productive.
She reminds me of Thomas Cochrane, demanding that his superior, Lord Gambier, be court-martialled for cowardice. The result was that the establishment closed ranks around Gambier.
If you thought Hegseth's stupid behaviour was bad before there are more details now.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had the Signal app installed on an office computer because he couldn’t get cell phone service in the Pentagon, according to a report.
Hegseth directed the installation of the encrypted app on a desktop Pentagon computer as a “work-around that enabled him to use Signal in a classified space,” the Washington Post reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The embattled former Fox News host discussed with aides how the app could enable them to coordinate more quickly with White House officials because of the Pentagon’s lack of cell phone service, according to the Post.
Constituency map (NI omitted) Plugging those numbers into StatsForLeftie's model yields this:
Points to note
Reform majority of around 100
LibDems as official opposition at 81 seats
Con in third at 58
SNP in fourth at 44
Lab in fifth at 41
Greens in sixth at 16.
ÿ
Good afternoon
The question is who will be the first to go below 20% or even both conservative and labour in due course
I would loathe such an outcome, but my "go-on-press-the-red-button" bad angel wants to see it on election night, at least before packing my bags and heading for the coast. It would be an amazing sight.
I wouldn’t head for the coast if I were you. You would almost certainly have a Reform MP.
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
On the recent discussion of the rights and wrongs of criticising the judiciary, this is quite an interesting precedent. In this my sympathies are (FWIW) entirely with Charlotte Proudman
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/24/why-do-they-dislike-me-so-much-the-trials-trolls-and-triumphs-of-britains-most-divisive-barrister ...In 2022 she typed a 14-part Twitter thread expressing frustration about a judgment by Sir Jonathan Cohen – who, like a handful of judges and dozens of senior barristers, was a member of the then men-only Garrick Club. Proudman felt the judgment had not taken the allegations of domestic abuse sufficiently seriously; she wrote that she was troubled by Cohen referring to the relationship between a woman and her ex-husband, who was a part-time judge and barrister, as “tempestuous” and describing the alleged domestic violence as “reckless”. She wrote that the case had “echoes of the ‘boys’ club’ which still exists among men in powerful positions”.
The Bar Standards Board responded by launching disciplinary proceedings, on the grounds that the thread “inaccurately reflected the finding of a judge on a case in which she was instructed”, and that Proudman had behaved in a way “which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public placed in her and in the profession”. She faced a 12-month suspension and £50,000 fine, but in December, after three years, all charges against her were dropped and the case was dismissed. The panel ruled that her tweets were protected under freedom of expression rules, and that they did not “gravely damage” the judiciary.
She has since launched proceedings against the Bar Standards Board. “Frankly, I’d like an apology and a sum of money to reflect the pain and distress that I’ve been put through,” she says. She would also like to understand why her male colleagues who abused her online have not been subject to similar proceedings.
I think there are intemperate forms of campaigning that are completely counter-productive.
She reminds me of Thomas Cochrane, demanding that his superior, Lord Gambier, be court-martialled for cowardice. The result was that the establishment closed ranks around Gambier.
I wasn't arguing the effectiveness of her argument, but rather her right to make it.
And in any event, I seriously doubt in this case that she'd have met with greater sympathy had she adopted quiet diplomacy.
Didn't @TSE post something a week or two ago suggesting there was a questionmark over their methodology? Or is that just wishful thinking on my part.
They tend to find far higher Reform numbers than anyone else - the interesting thing would be whether their Reform nunbers are rising compared to previous polls on the same (possibly flawed) methodology.
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
Looking at the details of the Find Out Now poll has even more bad news for Labour, though maybe with a silver lining.
The Conservatives retain 70% of their GE24 vote, 23% going to Reform, 4% to Lib Dems Liberal Democrats also retain 70% of their GE24 vote, 9% to Green, 8% to Lib Dems Reform UK retain 91% of their GE24 vote and 4% go to Other. Greens keep 87% with 7% going to Labour, 4% to Lib Dems SNP keep 73% with 13% going to Greens, 6% to Labour.
Labour are only holding onto 56%, but only 14% going rightward (Ref 9% and Con 5%) and 28% leftwards (Green 14%, Lib Dem 13%, SNP 1%). It seems like there are votes available on Labour's left flank but Starmer doesn't seem to want to go after their support.
The scary numbers for Conservatives are that Reform beat them 22:6 in the 18-29 age range and 24:12 in the 30-39 age range.
Didn't @TSE post something a week or two ago suggesting there was a questionmark over their methodology? Or is that just wishful thinking on my part.
As I understand it Matthew Goodwin is now affiliated with them, and he was the worst pollster at the last general election.
I remember being told their raw numbers in one poll had something like 13% of the population voting for Reform at GE2024 which is out of kilter with reality when it was below 9%.
On the recent discussion of the rights and wrongs of criticising the judiciary, this is quite an interesting precedent. In this my sympathies are (FWIW) entirely with Charlotte Proudman
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/24/why-do-they-dislike-me-so-much-the-trials-trolls-and-triumphs-of-britains-most-divisive-barrister ...In 2022 she typed a 14-part Twitter thread expressing frustration about a judgment by Sir Jonathan Cohen – who, like a handful of judges and dozens of senior barristers, was a member of the then men-only Garrick Club. Proudman felt the judgment had not taken the allegations of domestic abuse sufficiently seriously; she wrote that she was troubled by Cohen referring to the relationship between a woman and her ex-husband, who was a part-time judge and barrister, as “tempestuous” and describing the alleged domestic violence as “reckless”. She wrote that the case had “echoes of the ‘boys’ club’ which still exists among men in powerful positions”.
The Bar Standards Board responded by launching disciplinary proceedings, on the grounds that the thread “inaccurately reflected the finding of a judge on a case in which she was instructed”, and that Proudman had behaved in a way “which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public placed in her and in the profession”. She faced a 12-month suspension and £50,000 fine, but in December, after three years, all charges against her were dropped and the case was dismissed. The panel ruled that her tweets were protected under freedom of expression rules, and that they did not “gravely damage” the judiciary.
She has since launched proceedings against the Bar Standards Board. “Frankly, I’d like an apology and a sum of money to reflect the pain and distress that I’ve been put through,” she says. She would also like to understand why her male colleagues who abused her online have not been subject to similar proceedings.
I think there are intemperate forms of campaigning that are completely counter-productive.
She reminds me of Thomas Cochrane, demanding that his superior, Lord Gambier, be court-martialled for cowardice. The result was that the establishment closed ranks around Gambier.
I wasn't arguing the effectiveness of her argument, but rather her right to make it.
And in any event, I seriously doubt in this case that she'd have met with greater sympathy had she adopted quiet diplomacy.
When attacked by Tweet, the best advice for anyone is ignore it! The more fuss you kick up, the more you draw attention to something that would probably otherwise be forgotten within 24 hours (if it even picked up on in the first place).
If you thought Hegseth's stupid behaviour was bad before there are more details now.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had the Signal app installed on an office computer because he couldn’t get cell phone service in the Pentagon, according to a report.
Hegseth directed the installation of the encrypted app on a desktop Pentagon computer as a “work-around that enabled him to use Signal in a classified space,” the Washington Post reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The embattled former Fox News host discussed with aides how the app could enable them to coordinate more quickly with White House officials because of the Pentagon’s lack of cell phone service, according to the Post.
I tell you. It’s migration migration migration. You can all squeal as much as you like, but this is becoming the overwhelming issue for a lot of people - because so much hinges on it, from crime to public services to the crashing NHS to housing to our tired scary towns to the billions we spunk on asylum hotels
Labour have no clue how to sort this, and even if they did they wouldn’t do it, because woke. The Tories are absolutely not trusted, because of the Boriswave
As things stand Farage will be PM next GE. The caveat, of course, is that this is a loooong way away
If you thought Hegseth's stupid behaviour was bad before there are more details now.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had the Signal app installed on an office computer because he couldn’t get cell phone service in the Pentagon, according to a report.
Hegseth directed the installation of the encrypted app on a desktop Pentagon computer as a “work-around that enabled him to use Signal in a classified space,” the Washington Post reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The embattled former Fox News host discussed with aides how the app could enable them to coordinate more quickly with White House officials because of the Pentagon’s lack of cell phone service, according to the Post.
Didn't @TSE post something a week or two ago suggesting there was a questionmark over their methodology? Or is that just wishful thinking on my part.
As I understand it Matthew Goodwin is now affiliated with them, and he was the worst pollster at the last general election.
I remember being told their raw numbers in one poll had something like 13% of the population voting for Reform at GE2024 which is out of kilter with reality when it was below 9%.
But he was mocked for having Labour as low as the mid 30s, which turned out to be too high, so credit where credit was due. Almost every other pollster called the Labour percentage too high until the bitter end
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
On the recent discussion of the rights and wrongs of criticising the judiciary, this is quite an interesting precedent. In this my sympathies are (FWIW) entirely with Charlotte Proudman
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/24/why-do-they-dislike-me-so-much-the-trials-trolls-and-triumphs-of-britains-most-divisive-barrister ...In 2022 she typed a 14-part Twitter thread expressing frustration about a judgment by Sir Jonathan Cohen – who, like a handful of judges and dozens of senior barristers, was a member of the then men-only Garrick Club. Proudman felt the judgment had not taken the allegations of domestic abuse sufficiently seriously; she wrote that she was troubled by Cohen referring to the relationship between a woman and her ex-husband, who was a part-time judge and barrister, as “tempestuous” and describing the alleged domestic violence as “reckless”. She wrote that the case had “echoes of the ‘boys’ club’ which still exists among men in powerful positions”.
The Bar Standards Board responded by launching disciplinary proceedings, on the grounds that the thread “inaccurately reflected the finding of a judge on a case in which she was instructed”, and that Proudman had behaved in a way “which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public placed in her and in the profession”. She faced a 12-month suspension and £50,000 fine, but in December, after three years, all charges against her were dropped and the case was dismissed. The panel ruled that her tweets were protected under freedom of expression rules, and that they did not “gravely damage” the judiciary.
She has since launched proceedings against the Bar Standards Board. “Frankly, I’d like an apology and a sum of money to reflect the pain and distress that I’ve been put through,” she says. She would also like to understand why her male colleagues who abused her online have not been subject to similar proceedings.
I think there are intemperate forms of campaigning that are completely counter-productive.
She reminds me of Thomas Cochrane, demanding that his superior, Lord Gambier, be court-martialled for cowardice. The result was that the establishment closed ranks around Gambier.
I wasn't arguing the effectiveness of her argument, but rather her right to make it.
And in any event, I seriously doubt in this case that she'd have met with greater sympathy had she adopted quiet diplomacy.
When attacked by Tweet, the best advice for anyone is ignore it! The more fuss you kick up, the more you draw attention to something that would probably otherwise be forgotten within 24 hours (if it even picked up on in the first place).
This is very good advice. Never complain never explain
Didn't @TSE post something a week or two ago suggesting there was a questionmark over their methodology? Or is that just wishful thinking on my part.
As I understand it Matthew Goodwin is now affiliated with them, and he was the worst pollster at the last general election.
I remember being told their raw numbers in one poll had something like 13% of the population voting for Reform at GE2024 which is out of kilter with reality when it was below 9%.
But he was mocked for having Labour as low as the mid 30s, which turned out to be too high, so credit where credit was due. Almost every other pollster called the Labour percentage too high until the bitter end
He had Reform nearly ahead of Labour, but his overall error was the worst.
Plus his supplementaries were the worst even from a BPC registered pollster when it came to leading Qs.
Nobody in the polling industry would take my bet that People Polling would be the worst pollster at the election.
Just caught up with the news and for once it's pretty inspiring.
"Vladimir, STOP!"
What a rebuke to all those cynics (including me) who had written off Donald Trump, thought he could never rise to the demands of his exalted office. This, I predict, will join "Ich bin ein Berliner" and "Mister Gorbachev, tear down this wall" in the annals of great presidential 'moments'.
Shades of the Cuban missile crisis as we (and the world) await the Russian leader's response.
The interesting thing is how he's managed to comprehensively mis-spell Volodymyr
I tell you. It’s migration migration migration. You can all squeal as much as you like, but this is becoming the overwhelming issue for a lot of people - because so much hinges on it, from crime to public services to the crashing NHS to housing to our tired scary towns to the billions we spunk on asylum hotels
Labour have no clue how to sort this, and even if they did they wouldn’t do it, because woke. The Tories are absolutely not trusted, because of the Boriswave
As things stand Farage will be PM next GE. The caveat, of course, is that this is a loooong way away
I'm coming round to the view that people from wherever are (probably) welcome here but they go to the back of the queue behind our own homeless and ill-housed people. The outcry might stir up some fast building of social housing.
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
What did they do at 1.20 today?
I don’t think anything happened, it’s more that Roger has a brain the size of a lizard, so his IQ peaks with the maximum sunshine, ie around noon, and when he topped out at IQ 74, he realised Labour are shite
So, on topic, how would Reform UK get to 10 MPs by the next election?
They won 5, but are now down to 4 following Lowe's departure. There could be further splits, although it's also possible Lowe could reconcile and re-join.
So, how do they increase? They could win by-elections. They seem likely to win in Runcorn & Helsby, which would bring them back to 5 MPs. They would then need more by-elections to happen, but there were 23 by-elections in the last Parliament or 21 in the last 5-year Parliament before that (2010-5), so Reform UK would only have to win about a fifth of them. (However, I note there were only 14 by-elections in 2005-10 and 6 in 2001-5. Why do we have more now?)
Have other parties made big gains in by-elections over the course of a Parliament? Labour won 8 by-elections across 2023/4 (net gain of 7 as they lost one to Galloway). The LibDems gained 4 over 2019-24. If Reform are currently the main opposition and leading in the polls, then making enough by-election gains seems very plausible.
What about defections? It could happen. Presumably from the Conservatives. UKIP got 2 defectors in the 2010-5 Parliament. There were 3 Con-to-Lab defections in the last Parliament. Sometimes an insurgent party can do better: Change UK got 11 through defections. The SDP got 28, was it? The New Party in 1931 got 7 defectors (but soon lost 2 of them). 10 Liberal MPs joined Labour in 1909/10.
So, if Reform UK remain together and competitive, getting to 10 MPs seems very doable to me. The risk is whether Reform UK implode in some manner, Farage walks away or creates a new party, or indeed if there's a merger with the Conservative Party.
On the recent discussion of the rights and wrongs of criticising the judiciary, this is quite an interesting precedent. In this my sympathies are (FWIW) entirely with Charlotte Proudman
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/24/why-do-they-dislike-me-so-much-the-trials-trolls-and-triumphs-of-britains-most-divisive-barrister ...In 2022 she typed a 14-part Twitter thread expressing frustration about a judgment by Sir Jonathan Cohen – who, like a handful of judges and dozens of senior barristers, was a member of the then men-only Garrick Club. Proudman felt the judgment had not taken the allegations of domestic abuse sufficiently seriously; she wrote that she was troubled by Cohen referring to the relationship between a woman and her ex-husband, who was a part-time judge and barrister, as “tempestuous” and describing the alleged domestic violence as “reckless”. She wrote that the case had “echoes of the ‘boys’ club’ which still exists among men in powerful positions”.
The Bar Standards Board responded by launching disciplinary proceedings, on the grounds that the thread “inaccurately reflected the finding of a judge on a case in which she was instructed”, and that Proudman had behaved in a way “which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public placed in her and in the profession”. She faced a 12-month suspension and £50,000 fine, but in December, after three years, all charges against her were dropped and the case was dismissed. The panel ruled that her tweets were protected under freedom of expression rules, and that they did not “gravely damage” the judiciary.
She has since launched proceedings against the Bar Standards Board. “Frankly, I’d like an apology and a sum of money to reflect the pain and distress that I’ve been put through,” she says. She would also like to understand why her male colleagues who abused her online have not been subject to similar proceedings.
I think there are intemperate forms of campaigning that are completely counter-productive.
She reminds me of Thomas Cochrane, demanding that his superior, Lord Gambier, be court-martialled for cowardice. The result was that the establishment closed ranks around Gambier.
Charlotte Proudman does rather tend to win her campaigns, so her technique does seem to work.
I tell you. It’s migration migration migration. You can all squeal as much as you like, but this is becoming the overwhelming issue for a lot of people - because so much hinges on it, from crime to public services to the crashing NHS to housing to our tired scary towns to the billions we spunk on asylum hotels
Labour have no clue how to sort this, and even if they did they wouldn’t do it, because woke. The Tories are absolutely not trusted, because of the Boriswave
As things stand Farage will be PM next GE. The caveat, of course, is that this is a loooong way away
I'm coming round to the view that people from wherever are (probably) welcome here but they go to the back of the queue behind our own homeless and ill-housed people. The outcry might stir up some fast building of social housing.
How can this even be an issue? If you weren’t born in this country, you have less rights to social welfare and social housing. The briefer your time here, the lesser your rights, until you have almost none if you arrived yesterday
This is basic human logic. We should also apply criminal and other tests - ie if you have a criminal record your rights to social housing are massively reduced. At the moment, AIUI, we do not do this, which is incredible
The Tories tried to introduce a law that anyone convicted of terror-related offences should not get social housing, Starmer obstructed it as soon as he won power
Constituency map (NI omitted) Plugging those numbers into StatsForLeftie's model yields this:
Points to note
Reform majority of around 100
LibDems as official opposition at 81 seats
Con in third at 58
SNP in fourth at 44
Lab in fifth at 41
Greens in sixth at 16.
ÿ
Good afternoon
The question is who will be the first to go below 20% or even both conservative and labour in due course
I would loathe such an outcome, but my "go-on-press-the-red-button" bad angel wants to see it on election night, at least before packing my bags and heading for the coast. It would be an amazing sight.
I wouldn’t head for the coast if I were you. You would almost certainly have a Reform MP.
Brighton will still be a safe space, I can guarantee.
So, on topic, how would Reform UK get to 10 MPs by the next election?
They won 5, but are now down to 4 following Lowe's departure. There could be further splits, although it's also possible Lowe could reconcile and re-join.
So, how do they increase? They could win by-elections. They seem likely to win in Runcorn & Helsby, which would bring them back to 5 MPs. They would then need more by-elections to happen, but there were 23 by-elections in the last Parliament or 21 in the last 5-year Parliament before that (2010-5), so Reform UK would only have to win about a fifth of them. (However, I note there were only 14 by-elections in 2005-10 and 6 in 2001-5. Why do we have more now?)
Have other parties made big gains in by-elections over the course of a Parliament? Labour won 8 by-elections across 2023/4 (net gain of 7 as they lost one to Galloway). The LibDems gained 4 over 2019-24. If Reform are currently the main opposition and leading in the polls, then making enough by-election gains seems very plausible.
What about defections? It could happen. Presumably from the Conservatives. UKIP got 2 defectors in the 2010-5 Parliament. There were 3 Con-to-Lab defections in the last Parliament. Sometimes an insurgent party can do better: Change UK got 11 through defections. The SDP got 28, was it? The New Party in 1931 got 7 defectors (but soon lost 2 of them). 10 Liberal MPs joined Labour in 1909/10.
So, if Reform UK remain together and competitive, getting to 10 MPs seems very doable to me. The risk is whether Reform UK implode in some manner, Farage walks away or creates a new party, or indeed if there's a merger with the Conservative Party.
Therefore, I think it might be a good bet.
As for why more by elections now, I guess it's the Recall Act (2015) and the expenses scandal before that? The Recall Act likely causes some to jump before they're pushed now, rather than hanging on until the next GE?
I tell you. It’s migration migration migration. You can all squeal as much as you like, but this is becoming the overwhelming issue for a lot of people - because so much hinges on it, from crime to public services to the crashing NHS to housing to our tired scary towns to the billions we spunk on asylum hotels
Labour have no clue how to sort this, and even if they did they wouldn’t do it, because woke. The Tories are absolutely not trusted, because of the Boriswave
As things stand Farage will be PM next GE. The caveat, of course, is that this is a loooong way away
I'm coming round to the view that people from wherever are (probably) welcome here but they go to the back of the queue behind our own homeless and ill-housed people. The outcry might stir up some fast building of social housing.
How can this even be an issue? If you weren’t born in this country, you have less rights to social welfare and social housing. The briefer your time here, the lesser your rights, until you have almost none if you arrived yesterday
This is basic human logic. We should also apply criminal and other tests - ie if you have a criminal record your rights to social housing are massively reduced. At the moment, AIUI, we do not do this, which is incredible
The Tories tried to introduce a law that anyone convicted of terror-related offences should not get social housing, Starmer obstructed it as soon as he won power
The logic of extending the scope of "human rights" is to erase the distinction between citizen and non-citizen. Too many people are invested in that project to make it easy to reverse course.
Didn't @TSE post something a week or two ago suggesting there was a questionmark over their methodology? Or is that just wishful thinking on my part.
As I understand it Matthew Goodwin is now affiliated with them, and he was the worst pollster at the last general election.
I remember being told their raw numbers in one poll had something like 13% of the population voting for Reform at GE2024 which is out of kilter with reality when it was below 9%.
But he was mocked for having Labour as low as the mid 30s, which turned out to be too high, so credit where credit was due. Almost every other pollster called the Labour percentage too high until the bitter end
He had Reform nearly ahead of Labour, but his overall error was the worst.
Plus his supplementaries were the worst even from a BPC registered pollster when it came to leading Qs.
Nobody in the polling industry would take my bet that People Polling would be the worst pollster at the election.
They had Labour in the mid thirties when other firms had them in the mid forties, and they ended up only getting 33% so I think they deserve recognition for that. It's always best to have a good edge on the favourite in betting. Could have just been luck I guess, but so could any poll
Taking it in turns to crash the economy is only fair.
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre. I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t. Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
They won't now that they know the voters are quite capable of doing their own PR. It's a simple 'who would you like least and how do I stop them'. it worked last time.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
I tell you. It’s migration migration migration. You can all squeal as much as you like, but this is becoming the overwhelming issue for a lot of people - because so much hinges on it, from crime to public services to the crashing NHS to housing to our tired scary towns to the billions we spunk on asylum hotels
Labour have no clue how to sort this, and even if they did they wouldn’t do it, because woke. The Tories are absolutely not trusted, because of the Boriswave
As things stand Farage will be PM next GE. The caveat, of course, is that this is a loooong way away
I'm coming round to the view that people from wherever are (probably) welcome here but they go to the back of the queue behind our own homeless and ill-housed people. The outcry might stir up some fast building of social housing.
How can this even be an issue? If you weren’t born in this country, you have less rights to social welfare and social housing. The briefer your time here, the lesser your rights, until you have almost none if you arrived yesterday
This is basic human logic. We should also apply criminal and other tests - ie if you have a criminal record your rights to social housing are massively reduced. At the moment, AIUI, we do not do this, which is incredible
The Tories tried to introduce a law that anyone convicted of terror-related offences should not get social housing, Starmer obstructed it as soon as he won power
The logic of extending the scope of "human rights" is to erase the distinction between citizen and non-citizen. Too many people are invested in that project to make it easy to reverse course.
Indeed
Even more remarkable, most people are unaware of how extreme official policy is, on things like this, that Brits get no preference over foreigners (arguably the opposite), that you can be convicted of terrorism yet get social housing, and on and on
All it takes is an articulate right wing populist to point out the insanity of our PRESENT policies - ie they don’t have to lie or exaggerate - and people stare in angry disbelief. Cf the asylum hotel bill
I tell you. It’s migration migration migration. You can all squeal as much as you like, but this is becoming the overwhelming issue for a lot of people - because so much hinges on it, from crime to public services to the crashing NHS to housing to our tired scary towns to the billions we spunk on asylum hotels
Labour have no clue how to sort this, and even if they did they wouldn’t do it, because woke. The Tories are absolutely not trusted, because of the Boriswave
As things stand Farage will be PM next GE. The caveat, of course, is that this is a loooong way away
Is this yet another of the numerous great Leon predictions? I guess you hope that if you make enough wild pronouncements about the future you might get the odd one right. You may recall that you told me not to bother booking my skiing holiday back in Feb 2022 as Putin was going to nuke us all. I am sure you will be delighted to know that I have had six marvellous trips to the Alps in the intervening period, so am very grateful that I didn't take your prediction too seriously.
Oh yes, and when are we expecting the next alien invasion? I was rather hoping that they would be benign, but unless they have disguised themselves as Donald Trump and Elon Musk (and almost certainly Zuckerberg) they seem to have failed to have materialised!
I tell you. It’s migration migration migration. You can all squeal as much as you like, but this is becoming the overwhelming issue for a lot of people - because so much hinges on it, from crime to public services to the crashing NHS to housing to our tired scary towns to the billions we spunk on asylum hotels
Labour have no clue how to sort this, and even if they did they wouldn’t do it, because woke. The Tories are absolutely not trusted, because of the Boriswave
As things stand Farage will be PM next GE. The caveat, of course, is that this is a loooong way away
I'm coming round to the view that people from wherever are (probably) welcome here but they go to the back of the queue behind our own homeless and ill-housed people. The outcry might stir up some fast building of social housing.
How can this even be an issue? If you weren’t born in this country, you have less rights to social welfare and social housing. The briefer your time here, the lesser your rights, until you have almost none if you arrived yesterday
This is basic human logic. We should also apply criminal and other tests - ie if you have a criminal record your rights to social housing are massively reduced. At the moment, AIUI, we do not do this, which is incredible
The Tories tried to introduce a law that anyone convicted of terror-related offences should not get social housing, Starmer obstructed it as soon as he won power
The logic of extending the scope of "human rights" is to erase the distinction between citizen and non-citizen. Too many people are invested in that project to make it easy to reverse course.
Duh, human rights are meant to be universal! Otherwise they would be citizen rights. The problem arises where people try to "mission creep" the intention of universal human rights
Comments
- https://findoutnow.co.uk/blog/voting-intention-23rd-april-2025/
- https://xcancel.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1915399486001512588#m
- https://bsky.app/profile/leftiestats.bsky.social
Constituency map (NI omitted)Plugging those numbers into StatsForLeftie's model yields this:
Points to note
All by myself...
Edit: Ah, I have a friend
Hegseth directed the installation of the encrypted app on a desktop Pentagon computer as a “work-around that enabled him to use Signal in a classified space,” the Washington Post reported, citing people familiar with the matter. The embattled former Fox News host discussed with aides how the app could enable them to coordinate more quickly with White House officials because of the Pentagon’s lack of cell phone service, according to the Post.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/hegseth-signal-app-pentagon-latest-b2738810.html
Good afternoon
The question is who will be the first to go below 20% or even both conservative and labour in due course
Lots of rest, liquids and just hope we feel a wee bit better each day
Thank you for asking
Maybe a trip to the doctors is in order if you don't feel any better? You don't want it developing into pneumonia.
What happens at the election is another matter but I think it'll be Kemi that leads them into the election.
But yep, it's locking your money away for 50% sometime in 2029. Not appealing even if the bet is.
It needs 3 (admittedly not entirely independent) events to happen.
At least 2 being odds against.
It's effectively a treble. I'd need double figures with the time of tying up money
Strange, as before the election he said it was all the fault of 14 years of conservative governments
We both have had our flu vaccines and neither of us have had a temperature
We are improving but ever so slowly
"Vladimir, STOP!"
What a rebuke to all those cynics (including me) who had written off Donald Trump, thought he could never rise to the demands of his exalted office. This, I predict, will join "Ich bin ein Berliner" and "Mister Gorbachev, tear down this wall" in the annals of great presidential 'moments'.
Shades of the Cuban missile crisis as we (and the world) await the Russian leader's response.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2jJc9N-DlU (9 mins)
The level of dislocation in our political class is bizarre.
I suggested the Tories chose PR. They didn’t.
Now I’m suggesting it to Labour.
Bet they don’t
https://x.com/warmonitor3/status/1915419333603299489
Pakistani rangers have capture an Indian constable soldier found on Pakistani territory confirmed.
I think if Reform look likely to win and Labour has a new leader some of their vote will regroup.
I had a damascene conversion at 1.20 today and realised that I don't really like Labour and am now a Lib Dem. I'd still vote Labour to stop Farage's mob but fortunately so would most sane voters. Sometimes Labour can be really dislikable and today was one of those days..
Kendall could lose Leicester West though.
I suspect the real reason these guys want to use Signal is so that they can drop all their comms into the void never to be seen again after each event so they can’t be used against them in the future. They want to be able to discuss & plan outright illegal things & never be held accountable for them.
In this my sympathies are (FWIW) entirely with Charlotte Proudman
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2025/apr/24/why-do-they-dislike-me-so-much-the-trials-trolls-and-triumphs-of-britains-most-divisive-barrister
...In 2022 she typed a 14-part Twitter thread expressing frustration about a judgment by Sir Jonathan Cohen – who, like a handful of judges and dozens of senior barristers, was a member of the then men-only Garrick Club. Proudman felt the judgment had not taken the allegations of domestic abuse sufficiently seriously; she wrote that she was troubled by Cohen referring to the relationship between a woman and her ex-husband, who was a part-time judge and barrister, as “tempestuous” and describing the alleged domestic violence as “reckless”. She wrote that the case had “echoes of the ‘boys’ club’ which still exists among men in powerful positions”.
The Bar Standards Board responded by launching disciplinary proceedings, on the grounds that the thread “inaccurately reflected the finding of a judge on a case in which she was instructed”, and that Proudman had behaved in a way “which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public placed in her and in the profession”. She faced a 12-month suspension and £50,000 fine, but in December, after three years, all charges against her were dropped and the case was dismissed. The panel ruled that her tweets were protected under freedom of expression rules, and that they did not “gravely damage” the judiciary.
She has since launched proceedings against the Bar Standards Board. “Frankly, I’d like an apology and a sum of money to reflect the pain and distress that I’ve been put through,” she says. She would also like to understand why her male colleagues who abused her online have not been subject to similar proceedings.
Customers told to expect further delays as contactless payments still down
https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/24/marks_spencer_outage_ongoing/
St Michael is the patron saint of cash.
She reminds me of Thomas Cochrane, demanding that his superior, Lord Gambier, be court-martialled for cowardice. The result was that the establishment closed ranks around Gambier.
If only Trump had been around in 1939, I'm sure Hitler would never have rolled the tanks into Poland... 😂
Lower score is better, the absolute error across all parties summed from the actual totals - excludes NI.
YG 43
More in Common 74
NS 75
Focaldata 78
Bookies 79
MRP Average 94
IPSOS 98
EC 119
Survation 138
Savanta 201
Genuinely. Not a snark.
I'm realising Sunak could have got it much more wrong.
First, best wishes to @Big_G_NorthWales and his wife. Hope the recovery speeds up and you are back to what passes for normal very soon.
81 seats? Ed Davey as LOTO? Yeah, right. I imagine Labour's seats would mostly be in London - I suspect East Ham will be one of them.
A majority on 28% of the vote - the epitome of a loveless landslide?
Remind me. Are they in the BPC?
https://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/officers-members/
The HyNet CCS Cluster achieved Final Investment Decision today.
Congratulations to ENI.
MRP Performance by seat at last GE.
And in any event, I seriously doubt in this case that she'd have met with greater sympathy had she adopted quiet diplomacy.
The Conservatives retain 70% of their GE24 vote, 23% going to Reform, 4% to Lib Dems
Liberal Democrats also retain 70% of their GE24 vote, 9% to Green, 8% to Lib Dems
Reform UK retain 91% of their GE24 vote and 4% go to Other.
Greens keep 87% with 7% going to Labour, 4% to Lib Dems
SNP keep 73% with 13% going to Greens, 6% to Labour.
Labour are only holding onto 56%, but only 14% going rightward (Ref 9% and Con 5%) and 28% leftwards (Green 14%, Lib Dem 13%, SNP 1%). It seems like there are votes available on Labour's left flank but Starmer doesn't seem to want to go after their support.
The scary numbers for Conservatives are that Reform beat them 22:6 in the 18-29 age range and 24:12 in the 30-39 age range.
I remember being told their raw numbers in one poll had something like 13% of the population voting for Reform at GE2024 which is out of kilter with reality when it was below 9%.
Shashank Joshi
@shashj
Our cover this week.
https://x.com/shashj/status/1915401913169826273
Labour have no clue how to sort this, and even if they did they wouldn’t do it, because woke. The Tories are absolutely not trusted, because of the Boriswave
As things stand Farage will be PM next GE. The caveat, of course, is that this is a loooong way away
Plus his supplementaries were the worst even from a BPC registered pollster when it came to leading Qs.
Nobody in the polling industry would take my bet that People Polling would be the worst pollster at the election.
They won 5, but are now down to 4 following Lowe's departure. There could be further splits, although it's also possible Lowe could reconcile and re-join.
So, how do they increase? They could win by-elections. They seem likely to win in Runcorn & Helsby, which would bring them back to 5 MPs. They would then need more by-elections to happen, but there were 23 by-elections in the last Parliament or 21 in the last 5-year Parliament before that (2010-5), so Reform UK would only have to win about a fifth of them. (However, I note there were only 14 by-elections in 2005-10 and 6 in 2001-5. Why do we have more now?)
Have other parties made big gains in by-elections over the course of a Parliament? Labour won 8 by-elections across 2023/4 (net gain of 7 as they lost one to Galloway). The LibDems gained 4 over 2019-24. If Reform are currently the main opposition and leading in the polls, then making enough by-election gains seems very plausible.
What about defections? It could happen. Presumably from the Conservatives. UKIP got 2 defectors in the 2010-5 Parliament. There were 3 Con-to-Lab defections in the last Parliament. Sometimes an insurgent party can do better: Change UK got 11 through defections. The SDP got 28, was it? The New Party in 1931 got 7 defectors (but soon lost 2 of them). 10 Liberal MPs joined Labour in 1909/10.
So, if Reform UK remain together and competitive, getting to 10 MPs seems very doable to me. The risk is whether Reform UK implode in some manner, Farage walks away or creates a new party, or indeed if there's a merger with the Conservative Party.
Therefore, I think it might be a good bet.
https://x.com/clashreport/status/1915421439957549459
BREAKING: India will end ceasefire agreement soon with Pakistan.
Source: Gulistan News, India
I expect she does rather annoy the old boys club.
This is basic human logic. We should also apply criminal and other tests - ie if you have a criminal record your rights to social housing are massively reduced. At the moment, AIUI, we do not do this, which is incredible
The Tories tried to introduce a law that anyone convicted of terror-related offences should not get social housing, Starmer obstructed it as soon as he won power
They had Labour in the mid thirties when other firms had them in the mid forties, and they ended up only getting 33% so I think they deserve recognition for that. It's always best to have a good edge on the favourite in betting. Could have just been luck I guess, but so could any poll
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/24/india/pahalgam-india-pakistan-attack-explainer-intl-hnk/index.html
Even more remarkable, most people are unaware of how extreme official policy is, on things like this, that Brits get no preference over foreigners (arguably the opposite), that you can be convicted of terrorism yet get social housing, and on and on
All it takes is an articulate right wing populist to point out the insanity of our PRESENT policies - ie they don’t have to lie or exaggerate - and people stare in angry disbelief. Cf the asylum hotel bill
Oh yes, and when are we expecting the next alien invasion? I was rather hoping that they would be benign, but unless they have disguised themselves as Donald Trump and Elon Musk (and almost certainly Zuckerberg) they seem to have failed to have materialised!