Ed Miliband has the support to become Prime Minister – politicalbetting.com
Ed Miliband has the support to become Prime Minister – politicalbetting.com
If you’re not mentally prepared for the possibility of Ed Miliband becoming Prime Minister then you should be. My logic since September 2024 when I tipped him at 100/1 was that he was very popular with Labour members who have the final say on who becomes Labour leader.
0
Comments
Milibandwagon - one one-thousandth of a bandwagon.
Does the same apply here?
One of my favourite politician anagrams..
Thank heaven we dodged that bullet!
Incidentally some new study of Nigel and Boris pet project shows why we are in a hole, so lets elect them again!
https://www.nber.org/papers/w34459
"These estimates suggest that by 2025, Brexit had reduced UK GDP by 6% to 8%, with the impact accumulating gradually over time. We estimate that investment was reduced by between 12% and 18%, employment by 3% to 4% and productivity by 3% to 4%."
https://x.com/ed_miliband/status/1992952570042839529
Now obviously the proof is in the pudding, but if he can reform the domestic nuclear industry that will count in his favour.
Currently the UK has some of the world’s most expensive domestic and commercial energy, and there’s a very clear link between low energy prices and economic growth.
Only a true idiot could be skewered like that, and instead of getting out of it with a mealy mouthed acknowledgement, decide to grind himself further on to the stake with dogged determination.
https://youtube.com/shorts/xl_dzeD_CeY?si=T-qsKHJXVq-H6ei1
Apologies for using the Tory Party short, but you really don't want to see the full thing anyway.
If Miliband is the answer then the labour members are as out of touch as conservative members in choosing their leader
Interesting poll from Lord Ashcroft
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2025/11/bbc-bias-the-licence-fee-the-two-child-benefit-cap-do-we-spend-too-much-or-tax-too-little-and-do-people-feel-theyre-doing-their-bit/
And it wouldn't have made the political problem of EU membership or free movement "go away" either; it would have got worse.
This suggests that media coverage of Nathan Gill was considerably more extensive in Wales than elsewhere, which is disturbing because it suggests coverage of Gill's treason was insufficient outside Wales, given that it was a matter of UK national importance.
Please share the petition as widely as possible.
https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=744215
It’s poor from Miliband but he’s a zealot and is he any worse than any of the rest of them. We are just ruled by very mediocre politicians.
We all remember how the art historian left a golden legacy for Gordon Brown
Slight mix up in the latest Guardian review...
https://x.com/HackBlackburn/status/1993223843083960498
"Has Britain's budget watchdog become too all-powerful?"
...
'Too' all-powerful? It's an absolute, you can't qualify it. This is as bad as when people say 'quite unique', as if something can be 'slightly one of a kind'.
Brexit party MEPs vote against plans to tackle Russian propaganda
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/10/brexit-party-meps-vote-against-measure-to-combat-russian-propaganda
There would've been relief but also concern by pro-EU types, leading to a drive by the Lib Dems (and Labour, once Corbyn was gone?) to more fully embed us via the euro and other means. And an unspoken commitment to never, ever, let the Great Unwashed put our membership at risk again. Whether there would've been recognition of deep dislike of the EU and an attempt to address those concerns is more difficult to say. Given the response to public anger at the promise of a referendum then signing up to Lisbon was to pretend everything was fine, I suspect not, which would've been grist to the UKIP mill.
We might already be in a UK with Prime Minister Farage, or a Con-UKIP/UKIP-Con Coalition.
And, for anyone who cares, I'd reiterate my suggestion to pro-EU types that you've got to learn to make an argument for the EU (economically not difficult, but it was utterly failed in the referendum) and engage on economics, politics, and identity.
We have had plenty of accusations (even in The Guardian) that some climate groups have been funded, or part funded, by Russia.
No stone left unturned.
I suspect this is why it won’t happen as it would touch all the main parties bar, possibly, the Greens.
Also, lifting the two-child benefit cap looks to be very unpopular right across the political spectrum.
61/24 against removing it
Also implied voting intention
Reform 27%
Conservative 20%
Green 18%
Labour 18%
Lib Dems 10%
Eurovision to change voting rules after claims of Israeli government 'interference'
The reduction in the number of votes that can be made online, or via SMS or phone call, from 20 to 10 was "designed to encourage more balanced participation", said contest director Martin Green.
The Eurovision Song Contest is changing its voting system, following allegations of "interference" by Israel's government this year.
Israeli singer Yuval Raphael received the largest number of votes from the public in the contest in May, ultimately finishing as runner-up after the jury votes were counted.
But a number of broadcasters raised concerns about Israel's result.
After the final, Irish broadcaster RTE requested a breakdown in voting numbers from contest organiser the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), while Spain's public broadcaster, Radio Television Espanola (RTVE), called for a "complete review" of the voting system to avoid "external interference".
In September, Dutch public broadcaster AVROTROS said it could no longer justify Israel's participation in the contest, due to the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza.
It went on to say there had been "proven interference by the Israeli government during the last edition of the Song Contest, with the event being used as a political instrument". The statement did not elaborate on the means of "interference".
https://news.sky.com/story/eurovision-to-change-voting-rules-after-claims-of-israeli-government-interference-13473662
Some industrial scale ignorance there.
Still uncorrected.
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/nov/24/civilisations-rise-and-fall-review-tv-make-you-despair-plummeting-society
(Though tbf, Ken is a fairly decent cultural critic himself - I quite enjoyed some of his jazz programmes for the Beeb.)
They don’t really have a preferred view on anything, they just want to sow discord and demoralisation in the West.
KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov was talking about it four decades ago.
https://bigthink.com/the-present/yuri-bezmenov/
But Reform appear to have considerably more ... form regarding this.
I'd say that was a positive thing.
Graduate recruitment over the past 2 years has been at the worst level for decades
Under GE conditions I'd expect them to clock about 25% - not enough to win.
As for voting intention, that does not disprove my point. Reform policies are generally disliked by the people who say they will vote for them.
(Though in Wilson's particular case, the verdict is 'unproven'.)
Perhaps more concerning......
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-KU6J7pwbY0
The ending of freedom for millions is now the official US position.
https://x.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1992977979841110229
Let’s think about that. Do you honestly think that if we had voted to remain, that we would now have an economy that was joint largest in the EU?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hancock_(British_politician)#Russian_aide's_arrest,_espionage_allegation_and_extra-marital_affair
They are a *Russian* party for the English. Get it right comrades.
I assume the Tory leadership think people
are stupidhave forgotten what they did in government. A glance at the polls and a random dip into social media rather defeats this optimistic hopium...I don't think there's much point arguing about it. This is economics - you can't conduct a scientific experiment and test this stuff and prove it. I think there are enough indicators to be pretty sure it's had a negative effect, which shouldn't be a surprise given we've put up a load of trade barriers and reduced skilled European migration (including people moving back). But I can't prove it.
You'll need to come up with evidence that the authors of the study are catnip motivated before you make a claim like that.
As each day passes labour own the economy
People didn't want a nominally larger economy for no change in GDP per head with all the social and cultural change that came with it.
You liked the social and cultural change, because values, yet still think raw GDP is an effective stick to beat those who disagree with you.
You've learned nothing.
Let's see how that goes down
A black Reform UK shirt. A gold party badge with the arrow pointing at 18.
Next up: a black leather sash across the chest and thigh length black leather boots.
And edit, I think that's why Ed Miliband won't be next PM. He's incapable of expressing in retail terms why things need to be done, even though he's an intelligent and effective minister.
As for Ed's popularity, it's not a mystery. He's got an agenda, he's got the Whitehall experience to push it through, and he's confident in a way that 2015 Ed wasn't. And if it annoys the other lot, so much the better.
It probably helps that his in-tray contained some easy wins in projects that the last lot had sat on, rather than the last-minute turds that many of the incoming team were bequeathed.
The polling, however, is more on my side than yours, with Brexit being almost as unpopular as Starmer.
Unfortunately, it's a Mexican stand-off: Reform won't go Tory over migration/behaviour, and Tories won't go Reform over economics/smell.
Sorry.
*It was 91% under the Tories; I think it's a bit lower now but can't find the number.
A real historian opines.
https://x.com/arthistorynews/status/1993071084002754613?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
Good morning, everyone.
£561 × how many million Pensioners.
We do not need or deserve an a ove inflation increase imo
The principle is OK, I'm happy for energy companies to pay tax on windfall profits that otherwise would fall on me. But the rate the levy is set at does matter. Companies need a reasonable rate of return on investment. I think a discussion of that would be a lot more helpful.
Karoline Leavitt on Ukraine:
The United States is still sending or selling a big amount of weapons to NATO.
We cannot do that forever.
https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1993058930986250450
Anyone describing that as a car crash interview has a personal issue with basic comprehension.
They’ve also bred a generation of politicans who don’t appear to believe in anything except their own election , followed by a younger generation of politicians raised online who have very strong beliefs of simple solutions which are impossible within the constraints of a democratic society beholden to bond markets.
* We’ve seen a bit of this exposed in the last few days with Twitter showing location data for accounts, with lots of accounts seemingly active in politics in one country, actually being from somewhere else, driven by ideological or financial reasons. The fallout has been rather amusing to watch.
Your side of the fence were insufferable for decades, and when you finally got your way, made a complete arse of it.
Get used to being reminded of that, interminably.
Just like when we had the windfall taxes and then lamented the lack of new investment. Who'd have thought?
Expectations of the budget are so low that Labour will see a minor recovery in the polls when it is all done and dusted. Despite all the bluster from the right wing press, there is still plenty of scope there for Labour to improve the living standards of those at the lower end of the income scale while confining the economic pain to those at the top end of the income and wealth scale. Mansion tax, higher rate pension contributions relief, CGT loopholes, freezing income tax thresholds only at the higher rates, etc etc. There is still scope for a few surprises.
If Labour gets back to polling in the low 20s as a consequence it will be enough to tide Starmer and Reeves over until May, but immediately after that a leadership challenge will still be almost inevitable in the wake of still lousy local and devolved election results, which will serve as a catalyst for a challenge.
Regarding Miliband, having tipped him here at 20/1 recently, I think it's realistically between him, Rayner and Streeting. All are in with a decent chance at this stage.
Re the EU, it's an interesting one... Would it have become more of an issue or would it have stayed as a marginal thing, particularly if a Miliband-led government actually fixed some of our structural issues (don't laugh!*). Before the 2015 election, the referendum promise ws a way to shoot UKIP's fox on the right and was, perhaps, important in the Con party win**. But it wasn't a very high priority issue for most people. It became so during the campaign, but - mostly - after the vote. I knew plenty of people who weren't very engaged in the question even during the campaign (we were obviously going to vote remain) who became rabid Europhiles or, more rarely, rabid Eurosceptics, post vote.
*FWIW I think 2015 Miliband would have triangulated like crazy, made Starmer look dynamic and decisive and achieved f-all. He's a different guy now, no longer cares so much about what people think and has the courage to pursue his convictions, for good or ill
**Although this, more than anything else, lost my vote as I saw it as a pointless distraction that would cost growth due to a bit of uncertainty. I voted Lab without a great deal of enthusiasm mainly over this. I wonder how many others felt similar - fewer than the gained UKIP voters? Quite possibly, but non-zero.
What the government could do is bin the EPL early while also reducing the tax allowance for new development from 91% to the standard 25%. Would you support such a position?
If the cost (in this case tax) is higher in one country where they produce then they make a lower profit on oil production in that country and that will influence their decisions on investment etc but it will make no difference to the market price of oil.
Milliband does get the economics of the energy market and he is trying to use those to achieve his aims. People don't necessarily like those aims, particularly oil executives with a personal bonus incentive, and they have money to lobby against them but Milliband doesn't want new oil & gas in the North Sea, he wants the energy companies to switch to renewable energy production.
"Almost two in three Labour members back Burnham over Starmer for leader, poll shows | Politics News | Sky News" https://news.sky.com/story/almost-two-in-three-labour-members-back-burnham-over-starmer-for-leader-poll-show-13441078
1) As a whole does the membership prefer to elect a likely election winner or to elect someone they prefer ideologically and emotionally.
2) Ditto the MPs.
3) Are they able to spot an election winner, even if they want to.
4) To what extent are MPs and members influenced by the current job a candidate is doing (Miliband and Healey are doing favoured jobs at the moment. Mahmood isn't).
5) Who would in fact be best at election winning.
6) Who in fact would, as PM, run the government and country competently and well.
7) Is there a dark horse of great brilliance hiding on the back benches.
For betting purposes (1) and (2) and a bit of (4) are the interesting questions. As the the future of UK plc, tough.