Skip to content

A little bit of history repeating? – politicalbetting.com

24

Comments

  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280
    edited December 17
    Dopermean said:

    Meanwhile, Trump is writing unhinged Truth Social posts about Venezuela and the oil and land they stole from the US. No, I don’t know what he’s going on about either.

    Nationalisation of oil industry, the US oil companies were forced to agree to better terms for Venezuela or ship out.

    Guyana has made the same errors decades later agreeing inequitable terms with Exxon.

    Remember when you're filling out your online ethics and compliance training for US oil companies, You "being taken to the football with complimentary pint and pie" is bribery, senior management transferring millions to a politician is a "facilitating payment required to conduct business", particularly if a substantial proportion is routed back.
    Presumably Trump is happy, as that is how corruption works under his Presidency.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280
    Does anyone here take the Ground News service?

    What do you think?

    AFAICS it is driven via social media sponsorships, but on reputable channels with reputations to lose if they just ut out blind propaganda.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 27,086
    Propellerheads feat: Miss Shirley Bassey - History Repeating (1997?)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzLT6_TQmq8
  • HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Because they thought his behaviour attracted voters from the red wall.
    When Boris was the outsider sticking it to the establishment he could attract support from the people.

    When he became the establishment sticking it to the people the dynamic had fundamentally changed.

    At that point he had to follow his own laws and be seen to be doing so.

    Dura lex, sed lex as Boris should have known.
  • Cheating fucking Aussies, this test and the entire series is tainted and should be awarded to England.

    Alex Carey's controversial reprieve on the first day of the third Ashes Test was down to an error by the operator of the Snicko technology.

    Carey admitted he edged a delivery from England pace bowler Josh Tongue that was caught by Jamie Smith when the Australia wicketkeeper had 72.

    Carey went on to make 106 in Australia's 326-8 at the Adelaide Oval.

    BBG Sports, the company that owns Snicko, has accepted culpability for the mistake.

    "Given that Alex Carey admitted he had hit the ball in question, the only conclusion that can be drawn from this, is that the Snicko operator at the time must have selected the incorrect stump mic for audio processing," BBG told BBC Sport.

    "In light of this, BBG Sports takes full responsibility for the error."

    It is understood the sound used for the review was taken from the stump microphone at the bowlers' end, rather than the strikers' end.

    This caused a discrepancy between the pictures and sound wave shown to TV umpire Chris Gaffaney.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c0mpjw7g7nko
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,805
    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    Indeed. Biden was sad to watch, but clearly those around him that were actually running things didn’t want to relinquish the power they had. They must have known he was unlikely to survive the pressure of the campaign, but pressed him anyway until they had no choice.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,104
    MattW said:

    Does anyone here take the Ground News service?

    What do you think?

    AFAICS it is driven via social media sponsorships, but on reputable channels with reputations to lose if they just ut out blind propaganda.

    Don’t even know what it is.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280
    Taz said:

    MattW said:

    Does anyone here take the Ground News service?

    What do you think?

    AFAICS it is driven via social media sponsorships, but on reputable channels with reputations to lose if they just ut out blind propaganda.

    Don’t even know what it is.
    It analyses news stories by affiliation, bias and ownership of source. It is used as a sponsor by channels such as Perun and Legal Eagle - both highly reputable.

    Here's Perun's sponsor segment from last week, explaining:
    https://youtu.be/r7aWmtOhMjo?t=162
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 45,492
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    The nominee Polymarket, with $300m+ traded so far, is very weird.

    https://polymarket.com/event/democratic-presidential-nominee-2028

    The two favourites are Newsom and AOC, and I don’t see how either of them get there. Middle America isn’t voting for a very coastal liberal.

    Gretchen Whitmer at 50/1 could be a good outsider, and they’ll want to keep at least one woman in the race for as long as possible. Josh Shapiro is probably underpriced at 20/1, as is Andy Beshear at 33/1.
    Middle America doesn't come into it. This is the nominee market.
    I do wonder if the Dem primary voters will even try and take into account the suitability of the candidates to beat a Republican (likely one of Rubio or Vance or DeSantis), or if they go for the most woke coastal ideologue that makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside?
    Should not be hard to beat that trio of absolute donkeys
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,632
    edited December 17

    She's going to end up looking like a power propellerhead.

    Well done TSE, I loved History Repeating Itself with Shirley Bassey and the Propellerheads. Don't know if its true, but I once read an article that claimed that after Shirley Bassey agreed to record with them the actual recording was delayed because when she turned up she insisted on performing with a live orchestra for the recording? But Shirley Bassey is always a class act and old school.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzLT6_TQmq8&list=RDyzLT6_TQmq8&start_radio=1
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,805
    Taz said:

    MattW said:

    Does anyone here take the Ground News service?

    What do you think?

    AFAICS it is driven via social media sponsorships, but on reputable channels with reputations to lose if they just ut out blind propaganda.

    Don’t even know what it is.
    It’s an AI bot (presumably) that reads all the newspapers and new media outlets, and gives a summary of how the same story is being covered by different sources, giving a ‘lean’ left or right for each source.

    It’s the same as a human reading for example a story about small boats in the Channel in both the Express and the Guardian, saying how the outlets cover the same thing with a different slant.

    Have seen the demo of it, but not a subscriber. It does on the face of it seem useful especially for online, New Media, sources.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,542

    Nigelb said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    Sadly, I just can't see how Buttigieg gets through the primaries in the South.

    Buttigieg needs to first explain why he repeatedly lied about Biden's fitness for office.

    He can then explain what he achieved himself as transport secretary for four years.
    You'll be going on about Hunter Biden next.
    None of that is in the slightest bit relevant to Democratic primaries in three years time.

    Assuming the US still has a democracy (not 100% guaranteed), the record of the current administration will be uppermost in voters minds, and whoever has the best shot at uniting the Democrats is likely to get the nomination.

    I doubt that will be Harris, and on current form, it might just be Newsom. He's not exactly adored by the Democratic base, but he's getting traction for leading the opposition to Trump. Quite what he does after leaving the governor's office at the end of 2026 is an interesting question.
    After four years of Trump, the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate. Harris isn’t that person.
    Well, quite.
    While she's still quite popular in the party, if you look at the polling, revisiting the arguments of 2024 would have the opposite effect.

    An interesting point about Newsom is that his current campaigning includes a lot of praise for Biden's economic record.
    He seems to be trying to go for big tent rather than defining himself against other Democrats.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,815
    edited December 17
    On topic, the Dems have a (bad) habit of picking whoever seems to be the next in line. I'm not entirely clear whether losing the election causes to lose your place in line. Trump kept his place but only by pretending he hadn't lost, which wasn't available to Harris because she has a less gullible primary electorate than him. But it might not, so she could well win the primary.

    An election with a weak challenger facing an unknown candidate likely chosen from an administration full of grifters and lunatics after a historically awful presidency probably slightly favours the challenger. So I would say there's value in 40/1 President Harris, if you trust anyone to sit on your money for that long.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280
    Sandpit said:

    Taz said:

    MattW said:

    Does anyone here take the Ground News service?

    What do you think?

    AFAICS it is driven via social media sponsorships, but on reputable channels with reputations to lose if they just ut out blind propaganda.

    Don’t even know what it is.
    It’s an AI bot (presumably) that reads all the newspapers and new media outlets, and gives a summary of how the same story is being covered by different sources, giving a ‘lean’ left or right for each source.

    It’s the same as a human reading for example a story about small boats in the Channel in both the Express and the Guardian, saying how the outlets cover the same thing with a different slant.

    Have seen the demo of it, but not a subscriber. It does on the face of it seem useful especially for online, New Media, sources.
    According to the wiki summary, it uses NLP processing - which I guess qualifies as a version of AI in these times. They are Canada-based.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_News
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,706
    This is a must read for anyone puzzled by the backlash against DEI.

    https://www.compactmag.com/article/the-lost-generation/
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,104
    Gil Gerard, star of Buck Rogers in the 25th century, has passed on.

    A show that briefly shone brightly and died quickly.

    https://x.com/thr/status/2001125331001074111?s=61
  • PJH said:

    Taz said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    That’s copium on a par with ‘Corbyn got a higher popular vote than Starmer’

    It doesn’t change the fact she lost and that she was a poor candidate.
    I suggest it is evidence that she was not as poor a candidate as some believe.

    Taz said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    That’s copium on a par with ‘Corbyn got a higher popular vote than Starmer’

    It doesn’t change the fact she lost and that she was a poor candidate.
    I suggest it is evidence that she was not as poor a candidate as some believe.
    She was a far superior candidate to Trump. As would almost anyone have beenn.

    What seems odd to me is that a candidate from the left has to be both moderate and personally perfect in every way to stand a chance of winning, yet a candidate from the right can be any raving lunatic with no principles whatsoever and that's perfectly fine. And I say that as a centrist with no axe to grind for either side.
    You think that Joe Biden was 'personally perfect' in 2020 ?

    It was already obvious that he was too old.

    But that didn't matter as over 45% would vote Dem under any circumstance and there were enough swing voters who wanted a change in government.

    The reverse happened in 2024.

    And likely will reverse again in 2028.

    And then reverse again in 2032.
    After all, 2024 was the year that pretty much all incumbents worldwide got clobbered. From that perspective, Harris did rather less badly than, say, Sunak.

    Is there any sign of governments being any more popular, anywhere, yet?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,542
    What is going on at the Heritage Foundation, and since when did they have principles ?

    Two more Heritage Foundation board members resign, per @isaac_schorr, with stunning statements

    Shane McCullar: "I cannot, in good conscience, remain on a board that is unwilling to confront the lapses in judgment that have harmed its credibility, its culture, and the conservative movement it once helped shape."

    Abby Spencer Moffat: "When an institution hesitates to confront harmful ideas and allows lapses in judgment to stand, it forfeits the moral authority on which its influence depends."

    https://x.com/emilybrooksnews/status/2001029308156907855
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 4,049

    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Where do we go from here ?

    Do we accept our new vassal status to the US as the Trump administration attempts to dismember the EU and redraw Europe's boundaries in collaboration with Putin ?

    Or do we side with Europe ?

    It not at all clear there's any way of avoiding the very uncomfortable choices coming up, long before any prospect of a change of leadership in the US (assuming that's still allowed to happen).

    There is no way of avoiding the choices.

    Europe needs someone to step up.

    Merz is the best hope. We shall see if he has the balls and the brains to realise the world the world has changed.
    I'd agree with you.
    I'm just curious what the rest of PB makes of it.
    Business as usual doesn't seem an option.
    I think Gardenwalker's idea of an Anglo-Canadian Union was the right sort of scale of response needed.

    It's very concerning that it looks like the EU will be unable to agree to seize Russian assets. That would indicate that the EU is not a reliable partner when it comes to confronting Russian aggression, weakened too much by quisling countries like Hungary, parochial self-interests, and weak links who can be easily intimidated by third countries. And a Le Pen victory in France will only make that worse.

    So we have to draw close to whichever friendly countries are left, to gain the scale to stand against those powers that are a threat to our freedoms.
    The British government hasn't seized the 25 billion quid of frozen Russian assets in the UK so basically what the fuck are you on about? The UK isn't any better, or worse depending on where you fall on the Ultra - Realist spectrum, than the EU with its 'quisling countries'.
    I don't think it's unreasonable for Britain to want to act at the same time as other countries who hold Russian assets.

    That's why I regret to Britain gaining scale, as being larger makes it easier to act unilaterally. An Anglo-Canadian Union would find it easier to act unilaterally than Britain does alone.
    Canada would prefer to build a bigger relationship with the EU than any kind of "Union" with GBNI.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 7,943
    fitalass said:

    She's going to end up looking like a power propellerhead.

    Well done TSE, I loved History Repeating Itself with Shirley Bassey and the Propellerheads. Don't know if its true, but I once read an article that claimed that after Shirley Bassey agreed to record with them the actual recording was delayed because when she turned up she insisted on performing with a live orchestra for the recording? But Shirley Bassey is always a class act and old school.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzLT6_TQmq8&list=RDyzLT6_TQmq8&start_radio=1
    There’s an album I bought in the late 90s, Shaken and Stirred: The David Arnold James Bond Project, where David Arnold reworked a load of Bond songs with different artists where there is a version of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service by the Propellerheads.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,104
    Waiting times for NHS ambulances in some parts of the country are shocking.

    https://x.com/zarahsultana/status/2001239119347995006?s=61
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,154

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    The expression 'the blind cannot see' comes to mind with your idolatry of Johnson
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280
    Can we talk bananas? (Good morning everyone)

    The south coast story about the washed-up containers of jetsam bananas, which I had not even noticed, has reached one of my reliable but idiosyncratic verticals - What's Going on with Shipping (Aka What the Ship?), run by a Yank with a lifetime of relevant experience. He uses what I think is a Lego globe to illustrate.

    It is taking the form of "Brits may be sent to prison for picking up washed-up bananas", and mentions - humourously, maybe - "You may go to jail." I think that's a gloss, and not mentioned in his source, which is the Daily Mail Twitter Feed (clang!). And he then pivots to "jail for expressing an opinion", which I think shows problems when verticals go off strict topic.

    https://youtu.be/kNy76pxHXos?list=PLRU6nSO2dZn4XWQcKCnCUHpcz1bsmVqmK&t=968

    Has anyone been out collecting bananas?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    edited December 17
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    Very true. Boris would have got minimum 30% and the Tories would have held many of the seats lost to the LDs and we would likely still be in a Duopoly in England
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,154

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    Very true. Boris would have got minimum 30% and the Tories would have held many of the seats lost to the LDs and we would likely still be in a Duopoly in England
    Yes and some of the redwall seats would likely have stayed Conservative too if Boris had led the Tories at the 2024 GE
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,604

    Nigelb said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    Sadly, I just can't see how Buttigieg gets through the primaries in the South.

    Buttigieg needs to first explain why he repeatedly lied about Biden's fitness for office.

    He can then explain what he achieved himself as transport secretary for four years.
    You'll be going on about Hunter Biden next.
    None of that is in the slightest bit relevant to Democratic primaries in three years time.

    Assuming the US still has a democracy (not 100% guaranteed), the record of the current administration will be uppermost in voters minds, and whoever has the best shot at uniting the Democrats is likely to get the nomination.

    I doubt that will be Harris, and on current form, it might just be Newsom. He's not exactly adored by the Democratic base, but he's getting traction for leading the opposition to Trump. Quite what he does after leaving the governor's office at the end of 2026 is an interesting question.
    After four years of Trump, the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate. Harris isn’t that person.
    I don't think Harris is the best choice for the Democrats in 2028, but I don't think it's fair to say she can't be a unifying candidate. She's in the middle of some of the party's internal debates. She has some gravitas as a former VP and candidate. She would be more of a unifying candidate than Newsom or AOC, two other names mentioned in this discussion.

    Also, do the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate? The Republicans didn't win in 2024 with a unifying candidate. They won with about the least unifying candidate in the history of US Presidential elections. Maybe the Democrats need a firebrand candidate who's good on social media (a role AOC and Newsom are both auditioning for). Whoever they pick, the Republicans and Musk's Twitter will pump out the claim that they are a dangerous woke obsessed radical!
  • PJHPJH Posts: 997

    PJH said:

    Taz said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    That’s copium on a par with ‘Corbyn got a higher popular vote than Starmer’

    It doesn’t change the fact she lost and that she was a poor candidate.
    I suggest it is evidence that she was not as poor a candidate as some believe.

    Taz said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    That’s copium on a par with ‘Corbyn got a higher popular vote than Starmer’

    It doesn’t change the fact she lost and that she was a poor candidate.
    I suggest it is evidence that she was not as poor a candidate as some believe.
    She was a far superior candidate to Trump. As would almost anyone have beenn.

    What seems odd to me is that a candidate from the left has to be both moderate and personally perfect in every way to stand a chance of winning, yet a candidate from the right can be any raving lunatic with no principles whatsoever and that's perfectly fine. And I say that as a centrist with no axe to grind for either side.
    You think that Joe Biden was 'personally perfect' in 2020 ?

    It was already obvious that he was too old.

    But that didn't matter as over 45% would vote Dem under any circumstance and there were enough swing voters who wanted a change in government.

    The reverse happened in 2024.

    And likely will reverse again in 2028.

    And then reverse again in 2032.
    I think even a senile Biden was a better candidate than Trump - less malevolent and less malevolent VP and team around him who would have been doing the bulk of the work. But you are right, too old and it was obvious.

    And yes there was an element of swingback against the incumbent. But that never seems to be enough if you have a 'Left Wing' or imperfect candidate from the Left opposing even a fairly unpopular right-wing incumbent. I just find that curious that it only seems to apply in one direction.

    In a UK Context it means I can't see someone like the Greens currently or a party like Your Party ever winning as they and their leader will be beyond the pale, but Reform could despite having a ragtag membership of incoherent and extreme views with a thoroughly untrustworthy character leading them. (FWIW, I will not vote for either, or have any preference as to which is worse).
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,496

    Cheating fucking Aussies, this test and the entire series is tainted and should be awarded to England.

    Alex Carey's controversial reprieve on the first day of the third Ashes Test was down to an error by the operator of the Snicko technology.

    Carey admitted he edged a delivery from England pace bowler Josh Tongue that was caught by Jamie Smith when the Australia wicketkeeper had 72.

    Carey went on to make 106 in Australia's 326-8 at the Adelaide Oval.

    BBG Sports, the company that owns Snicko, has accepted culpability for the mistake.

    "Given that Alex Carey admitted he had hit the ball in question, the only conclusion that can be drawn from this, is that the Snicko operator at the time must have selected the incorrect stump mic for audio processing," BBG told BBC Sport.

    "In light of this, BBG Sports takes full responsibility for the error."

    It is understood the sound used for the review was taken from the stump microphone at the bowlers' end, rather than the strikers' end.

    This caused a discrepancy between the pictures and sound wave shown to TV umpire Chris Gaffaney.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c0mpjw7g7nko

    Also if he hit it and didn't walk, will the Aussie fans give him the same abuse they gave Stuart Broad?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    Very true. Boris would have got minimum 30% and the Tories would have held many of the seats lost to the LDs and we would likely still be in a Duopoly in England
    Yes and some of the redwall seats would likely have stayed Conservative too if Boris had led the Tories at the 2024 GE
    Certainly the likes of Middlesborough S and Cleveland East, Darlington, Redcar, Rother Valley etc woukd have stayed blue at 3 or 4% higher nationally under a 'remaining Boris' 2024 election
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,604
    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    The nominee Polymarket, with $300m+ traded so far, is very weird.

    https://polymarket.com/event/democratic-presidential-nominee-2028

    The two favourites are Newsom and AOC, and I don’t see how either of them get there. Middle America isn’t voting for a very coastal liberal.

    Gretchen Whitmer at 50/1 could be a good outsider, and they’ll want to keep at least one woman in the race for as long as possible. Josh Shapiro is probably underpriced at 20/1, as is Andy Beshear at 33/1.
    Middle America doesn't come into it. This is the nominee market.
    I do wonder if the Dem primary voters will even try and take into account the suitability of the candidates to beat a Republican (likely one of Rubio or Vance or DeSantis), or if they go for the most woke coastal ideologue that makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside?
    Should not be hard to beat that trio of absolute donkeys
    Quite. Trump is at record levels of unpopularity. If that continues (probable), and the election is fair (unknown), then the Democrats will win with just about anyone, and said winner will get the Nobel Peace Prize just for not being Trump.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    The expression 'the blind cannot see' comes to mind with your idolatry of Johnson
    The obvious question is how would the Conservative Party survive having a Prime Minister suspended from Parliament for obvious lying?

    But to be charitable... Johnson was the most electorally successful Conservative leader since Thatcher- the only one to get a thumping majority. Mostly by persuading Farage to walk off the relevant bits of the battlefield in 2019.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280

    Christ, that Jane Austen style shipping forecast on R4 is total cringe. If they didn’t cobble it together using AI they made every effort to make it sound as if they did.

    I find it impenetrable but restful. It's good if some things don't change!

    What? Has something changed with the Shipping Forecast?

    This is important.

    We need something more populist, like: "Blowing a hooley in Scotland; midges grounded."
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,542

    Nigelb said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    Sadly, I just can't see how Buttigieg gets through the primaries in the South.

    Buttigieg needs to first explain why he repeatedly lied about Biden's fitness for office.

    He can then explain what he achieved himself as transport secretary for four years.
    You'll be going on about Hunter Biden next.
    None of that is in the slightest bit relevant to Democratic primaries in three years time.

    Assuming the US still has a democracy (not 100% guaranteed), the record of the current administration will be uppermost in voters minds, and whoever has the best shot at uniting the Democrats is likely to get the nomination.

    I doubt that will be Harris, and on current form, it might just be Newsom. He's not exactly adored by the Democratic base, but he's getting traction for leading the opposition to Trump. Quite what he does after leaving the governor's office at the end of 2026 is an interesting question.
    After four years of Trump, the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate. Harris isn’t that person.
    I don't think Harris is the best choice for the Democrats in 2028, but I don't think it's fair to say she can't be a unifying candidate. She's in the middle of some of the party's internal debates. She has some gravitas as a former VP and candidate. She would be more of a unifying candidate than Newsom or AOC, two other names mentioned in this discussion.

    Also, do the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate? The Republicans didn't win in 2024 with a unifying candidate. They won with about the least unifying candidate in the history of US Presidential elections. Maybe the Democrats need a firebrand candidate who's good on social media (a role AOC and Newsom are both auditioning for). Whoever they pick, the Republicans and Musk's Twitter will pump out the claim that they are a dangerous woke obsessed radical!
    PBers have already started with that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 84,542

    Cheating fucking Aussies, this test and the entire series is tainted and should be awarded to England.

    Alex Carey's controversial reprieve on the first day of the third Ashes Test was down to an error by the operator of the Snicko technology.

    Carey admitted he edged a delivery from England pace bowler Josh Tongue that was caught by Jamie Smith when the Australia wicketkeeper had 72.

    Carey went on to make 106 in Australia's 326-8 at the Adelaide Oval.

    BBG Sports, the company that owns Snicko, has accepted culpability for the mistake.

    "Given that Alex Carey admitted he had hit the ball in question, the only conclusion that can be drawn from this, is that the Snicko operator at the time must have selected the incorrect stump mic for audio processing," BBG told BBC Sport.

    "In light of this, BBG Sports takes full responsibility for the error."

    It is understood the sound used for the review was taken from the stump microphone at the bowlers' end, rather than the strikers' end.

    This caused a discrepancy between the pictures and sound wave shown to TV umpire Chris Gaffaney.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c0mpjw7g7nko

    Also if he hit it and didn't walk, will the Aussie fans give him the same abuse they gave Stuart Broad?
    They'll just blame Broad for setting a precedent.
  • eekeek Posts: 32,172

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    Very true. Boris would have got minimum 30% and the Tories would have held many of the seats lost to the LDs and we would likely still be in a Duopoly in England
    Yes and some of the redwall seats would likely have stayed Conservative too if Boris had led the Tories at the 2024 GE
    Certainly the likes of Middlesborough S and Cleveland East, Darlington, Redcar, Rother Valley etc woukd have stayed blue at 3 or 4% higher nationally under a 'remaining Boris' 2024 election
    Wouldn’t say that Darlington would have
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,893

    Cheating fucking Aussies, this test and the entire series is tainted and should be awarded to England.

    Alex Carey's controversial reprieve on the first day of the third Ashes Test was down to an error by the operator of the Snicko technology.

    Carey admitted he edged a delivery from England pace bowler Josh Tongue that was caught by Jamie Smith when the Australia wicketkeeper had 72.

    Carey went on to make 106 in Australia's 326-8 at the Adelaide Oval.

    BBG Sports, the company that owns Snicko, has accepted culpability for the mistake.

    "Given that Alex Carey admitted he had hit the ball in question, the only conclusion that can be drawn from this, is that the Snicko operator at the time must have selected the incorrect stump mic for audio processing," BBG told BBC Sport.

    "In light of this, BBG Sports takes full responsibility for the error."

    It is understood the sound used for the review was taken from the stump microphone at the bowlers' end, rather than the strikers' end.

    This caused a discrepancy between the pictures and sound wave shown to TV umpire Chris Gaffaney.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c0mpjw7g7nko

    No surprise. The place is heaving with convict DNA....
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    edited December 17

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    The expression 'the blind cannot see' comes to mind with your idolatry of Johnson
    The obvious question is how would the Conservative Party survive having a Prime Minister suspended from Parliament for obvious lying?

    But to be charitable... Johnson was the most electorally successful Conservative leader since Thatcher- the only one to get a thumping majority. Mostly by persuading Farage to walk off the relevant bits of the battlefield in 2019.
    Hed have called an election if the defenestration hadnt happened 'let the people judge' and run on a Trump style 'they are after me to get to you' basis which would have fired up his fans and the likes of the 30% currently cheering for Nigel etc.
    His lowest poll score (not includimg Goodwin at 25%) was 3% above the 2024 return and mostly low 30s even post Pincher

    Hed have lost but held 200 to 220 seats or so
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 41,304
    I might be the only one, but I think the Democrats stand a good chance running Kamala again with the slogan "Everything she said was true and everything he said was a lie"

    We tried the charismatic frontman, and suffered the consequences. You can argue that we then voted for boring competence and didn't get it, but Starmer won a landslide.

    Kamala could do the same.

    If she promises to tear down the ballroom that could swing a few states...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,893
    Scott_xP said:

    I might be the only one, but I think the Democrats stand a good chance running Kamala again with the slogan "Everything she said was true and everything he said was a lie"

    We tried the charismatic frontman, and suffered the consequences. You can argue that we then voted for boring competence and didn't get it, but Starmer won a landslide.

    Kamala could do the same.

    If she promises to tear down the ballroom that could swing a few states...

    I think that is a fair strategy. She needs a bulldog of a running mate though.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,604

    Scott_xP said:

    I might be the only one, but I think the Democrats stand a good chance running Kamala again with the slogan "Everything she said was true and everything he said was a lie"

    We tried the charismatic frontman, and suffered the consequences. You can argue that we then voted for boring competence and didn't get it, but Starmer won a landslide.

    Kamala could do the same.

    If she promises to tear down the ballroom that could swing a few states...

    I think that is a fair strategy. She needs a bulldog of a running mate though.
    I would suggest Camille Zapata. (She's who writes Gavin Newsom's tweets.)
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,632
    boulay said:

    fitalass said:

    She's going to end up looking like a power propellerhead.

    Well done TSE, I loved History Repeating Itself with Shirley Bassey and the Propellerheads. Don't know if its true, but I once read an article that claimed that after Shirley Bassey agreed to record with them the actual recording was delayed because when she turned up she insisted on performing with a live orchestra for the recording? But Shirley Bassey is always a class act and old school.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzLT6_TQmq8&list=RDyzLT6_TQmq8&start_radio=1
    There’s an album I bought in the late 90s, Shaken and Stirred: The David Arnold James Bond Project, where David Arnold reworked a load of Bond songs with different artists where there is a version of On Her Majesty’s Secret Service by the Propellerheads.
    My favourite James Bond Theme song is Louis Armstrong's We Have All The Time In The World from On Her Majesty's Secret Service, in fact one of my all time favourite top 10 songs and I have very electic music tastes so its up there with other more modern songs.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,893

    Scott_xP said:

    I might be the only one, but I think the Democrats stand a good chance running Kamala again with the slogan "Everything she said was true and everything he said was a lie"

    We tried the charismatic frontman, and suffered the consequences. You can argue that we then voted for boring competence and didn't get it, but Starmer won a landslide.

    Kamala could do the same.

    If she promises to tear down the ballroom that could swing a few states...

    I think that is a fair strategy. She needs a bulldog of a running mate though.
    I would suggest Camille Zapata. (She's who writes Gavin Newsom's tweets.)
    Nah. Needs to pass the "would have a drink at the bar with this guy" test. Two women is just too much of a risk.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 17,604

    Scott_xP said:

    I might be the only one, but I think the Democrats stand a good chance running Kamala again with the slogan "Everything she said was true and everything he said was a lie"

    We tried the charismatic frontman, and suffered the consequences. You can argue that we then voted for boring competence and didn't get it, but Starmer won a landslide.

    Kamala could do the same.

    If she promises to tear down the ballroom that could swing a few states...

    I think that is a fair strategy. She needs a bulldog of a running mate though.
    I would suggest Camille Zapata. (She's who writes Gavin Newsom's tweets.)
    Nah. Needs to pass the "would have a drink at the bar with this guy" test. Two women is just too much of a risk.
    (I wasn't being entirely serious.)
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    edited December 17
    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    Very true. Boris would have got minimum 30% and the Tories would have held many of the seats lost to the LDs and we would likely still be in a Duopoly in England
    Yes and some of the redwall seats would likely have stayed Conservative too if Boris had led the Tories at the 2024 GE
    Certainly the likes of Middlesborough S and Cleveland East, Darlington, Redcar, Rother Valley etc woukd have stayed blue at 3 or 4% higher nationally under a 'remaining Boris' 2024 election
    Wouldn’t say that Darlington would have
    Rishi only lost it by 5.5%, tories on 34% against 24% nationally.
    30% nationally (as in this example) and theyd almost certainly have held it
    Obviously a 'what if' and the local result last Thursday says Darlington now is locked in Reform Gain but Boris Tories would imo have held it if Rishi Tories were that close
  • Hydrogen production: gasification, pyrolysis and emerging techniques

    An evidence review on emerging hydrogen production technologies, including gasification and pyrolysis, focusing on environmental aspects.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hydrogen-production-gasification-pyrolysis-and-emerging-techniques

    Latest in a series of Environment Agency reviews on how to make hydrogen. Others (electrolysis of water; methane and refinery gas) are linked at the bottom of that page.

  • RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,805
    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    Tax rises going on foreign students now.

    Erasmus was a very one-sided scheme in the first place, they should be paying the UK for us to join.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,143

    malcolmg said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    The nominee Polymarket, with $300m+ traded so far, is very weird.

    https://polymarket.com/event/democratic-presidential-nominee-2028

    The two favourites are Newsom and AOC, and I don’t see how either of them get there. Middle America isn’t voting for a very coastal liberal.

    Gretchen Whitmer at 50/1 could be a good outsider, and they’ll want to keep at least one woman in the race for as long as possible. Josh Shapiro is probably underpriced at 20/1, as is Andy Beshear at 33/1.
    Middle America doesn't come into it. This is the nominee market.
    I do wonder if the Dem primary voters will even try and take into account the suitability of the candidates to beat a Republican (likely one of Rubio or Vance or DeSantis), or if they go for the most woke coastal ideologue that makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside?
    Should not be hard to beat that trio of absolute donkeys
    Quite. Trump is at record levels of unpopularity. If that continues (probable), and the election is fair (unknown), then the Democrats will win with just about anyone, and said winner will get the Nobel Peace Prize just for not being Trump.
    Sorta like Obama and GWB?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 58,805

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
    The £570m is the membership fee.
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 812
    edited December 17
    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,893

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    Boris had driven too many of his colleagues away with his own behaviour.

    And would have driven even more away if he had remained PM for a few more months.

    Say what you like but the fundamental problem was Boris's journey of self-destruction and the unwillingness of the Conservative establishment to do anything about it.

    Boris could have been prime minister for ten years if he had been willing to have some self-control.

    But he preferred to go to lockdown parties, grift money for redecorating and continually lie to his colleagues about trivial things.

    He could have been Henry V. He prefered to dick around with Falstaff and Doll Tearsheet. A real shame, but he had to go.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    That seat projection looks overly generous to LDs to me
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 40,115

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    geoffw said:

    Sandpit said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    If they’d actually had primaries and nominated a candidate who wasn’t terrible, they might even have beaten Trump.
    Biden hanging on till the last moment didn't help

    With the support of his cabinet and the Dem establishment.

    Compare how the cabinet and MPs forced Boris out here to the lickspittle loyalty Buttigieg and the others showed to Biden.
    Yes and forcing Boris out led to a landslide Labour victory and loss of the all the Conservative redwall seats, Biden I suspect would still have done better in the rustbelt than Harris did as he did in 2020
    Boris was on a bizarre journey of self-destruction, he would never had lasted to 2024.

    What you Conservatives need to ask yourselves is why you never made any attempt to control Boris's behaviour as PM.
    Had Boris remained Conservative leader, Reform would not have got 14% at the last GE and Reform would not now be leading the polls.

    Indeed Sunak might now be leading the polls as the new LOTO, Rishi made a stupid political move resigning to remove Boris
    The expression 'the blind cannot see' comes to mind with your idolatry of Johnson
    The obvious question is how would the Conservative Party survive having a Prime Minister suspended from Parliament for obvious lying?

    But to be charitable... Johnson was the most electorally successful Conservative leader since Thatcher- the only one to get a thumping majority. Mostly by persuading Farage to walk off the relevant bits of the battlefield in 2019.
    Boris won a thumping majority - then proceeded to shit the bed.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,510
    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
    The £570m is the membership fee.
    Taking money from the working class and giving it to the children of the middle classes.
  • eekeek Posts: 32,172
    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
    The £570m is the membership fee.
    Taking money from the working class and giving it to the children of the middle classes.
    Giving how student loans work you would need to be very rich middle class to subsidize a year abroad
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,365
    PJH said:

    PJH said:

    Taz said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    That’s copium on a par with ‘Corbyn got a higher popular vote than Starmer’

    It doesn’t change the fact she lost and that she was a poor candidate.
    I suggest it is evidence that she was not as poor a candidate as some believe.

    Taz said:

    Harris lost the popular vote by a mere 1.5%. She got a higher share of the popular vote than Trump did in 2016, than Dubya did in 2000, or than Bill Clinton did in 1992.

    That’s copium on a par with ‘Corbyn got a higher popular vote than Starmer’

    It doesn’t change the fact she lost and that she was a poor candidate.
    I suggest it is evidence that she was not as poor a candidate as some believe.
    She was a far superior candidate to Trump. As would almost anyone have beenn.

    What seems odd to me is that a candidate from the left has to be both moderate and personally perfect in every way to stand a chance of winning, yet a candidate from the right can be any raving lunatic with no principles whatsoever and that's perfectly fine. And I say that as a centrist with no axe to grind for either side.
    You think that Joe Biden was 'personally perfect' in 2020 ?

    It was already obvious that he was too old.

    But that didn't matter as over 45% would vote Dem under any circumstance and there were enough swing voters who wanted a change in government.

    The reverse happened in 2024.

    And likely will reverse again in 2028.

    And then reverse again in 2032.
    I think even a senile Biden was a better candidate than Trump - less malevolent and less malevolent VP and team around him who would have been doing the bulk of the work. But you are right, too old and it was obvious.

    And yes there was an element of swingback against the incumbent. But that never seems to be enough if you have a 'Left Wing' or imperfect candidate from the Left opposing even a fairly unpopular right-wing incumbent. I just find that curious that it only seems to apply in one direction.

    In a UK Context it means I can't see someone like the Greens currently or a party like Your Party ever winning as they and their leader will be beyond the pale, but Reform could despite having a ragtag membership of incoherent and extreme views with a thoroughly untrustworthy character leading them. (FWIW, I will not vote for either, or have any preference as to which is worse).
    No idea about the US, but for the UK part of that the opinion I've arrived at is that the UK population is simply on net moderately right of centre, and so for a left wing party to overcome that they need to do more than rely on the incumbent being unpopular.

    Regarding Reform in particular I see that as a Farage specific phenomenon -- he's making extremely good use of what I think of as the charisma element of politics: if you have that then a lot of voters will vote based on their impression of you and won't be thinking about policy specifics or the rest of your party. Johnson and Blair I think had this too. Would Reform led by, say, Tice, have made the breakthroughs they have? I doubt it, I think they might at best be hoping to hit something like the current Green party levels of attention and support.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,893

    Scott_xP said:

    I might be the only one, but I think the Democrats stand a good chance running Kamala again with the slogan "Everything she said was true and everything he said was a lie"

    We tried the charismatic frontman, and suffered the consequences. You can argue that we then voted for boring competence and didn't get it, but Starmer won a landslide.

    Kamala could do the same.

    If she promises to tear down the ballroom that could swing a few states...

    I think that is a fair strategy. She needs a bulldog of a running mate though.
    I would suggest Camille Zapata. (She's who writes Gavin Newsom's tweets.)
    Nah. Needs to pass the "would have a drink at the bar with this guy" test. Two women is just too much of a risk.
    (I wasn't being entirely serious.)
    Dangerous. Don't give them crazy ideas!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,154

    Nigelb said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    Sadly, I just can't see how Buttigieg gets through the primaries in the South.

    Buttigieg needs to first explain why he repeatedly lied about Biden's fitness for office.

    He can then explain what he achieved himself as transport secretary for four years.
    You'll be going on about Hunter Biden next.
    None of that is in the slightest bit relevant to Democratic primaries in three years time.

    Assuming the US still has a democracy (not 100% guaranteed), the record of the current administration will be uppermost in voters minds, and whoever has the best shot at uniting the Democrats is likely to get the nomination.

    I doubt that will be Harris, and on current form, it might just be Newsom. He's not exactly adored by the Democratic base, but he's getting traction for leading the opposition to Trump. Quite what he does after leaving the governor's office at the end of 2026 is an interesting question.
    After four years of Trump, the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate. Harris isn’t that person.
    I don't think Harris is the best choice for the Democrats in 2028, but I don't think it's fair to say she can't be a unifying candidate. She's in the middle of some of the party's internal debates. She has some gravitas as a former VP and candidate. She would be more of a unifying candidate than Newsom or AOC, two other names mentioned in this discussion.

    Also, do the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate? The Republicans didn't win in 2024 with a unifying candidate. They won with about the least unifying candidate in the history of US Presidential elections. Maybe the Democrats need a firebrand candidate who's good on social media (a role AOC and Newsom are both auditioning for). Whoever they pick, the Republicans and Musk's Twitter will pump out the claim that they are a dangerous woke obsessed radical!
    If Trump and Vance's approval rating is below 45% in 2028 the Democrats will likely win the presidency whoever they nominate.

    If Trump gets his approval rating back up to 45-50% then they likely need a centrist charismatic candidate to have a chance
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 47,095
    edited December 17

    Cheating fucking Aussies, this test and the entire series is tainted and should be awarded to England.

    Alex Carey's controversial reprieve on the first day of the third Ashes Test was down to an error by the operator of the Snicko technology.

    Carey admitted he edged a delivery from England pace bowler Josh Tongue that was caught by Jamie Smith when the Australia wicketkeeper had 72.

    Carey went on to make 106 in Australia's 326-8 at the Adelaide Oval.

    BBG Sports, the company that owns Snicko, has accepted culpability for the mistake.

    "Given that Alex Carey admitted he had hit the ball in question, the only conclusion that can be drawn from this, is that the Snicko operator at the time must have selected the incorrect stump mic for audio processing," BBG told BBC Sport.

    "In light of this, BBG Sports takes full responsibility for the error."

    It is understood the sound used for the review was taken from the stump microphone at the bowlers' end, rather than the strikers' end.

    This caused a discrepancy between the pictures and sound wave shown to TV umpire Chris Gaffaney.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/articles/c0mpjw7g7nko

    No surprise. The place is heaving with convict DNA....
    What makes you think England* isn't? The Aussies stopped accepting criminals a very long time ago.

    *In this particular context - but applicable to the UK generally, of course.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,154
    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Either way a Plaid FM looks likely even if Reform won most Welsh seats, though I doubt the voteshares change much now so Labour will likely remain in power as minority partners with Plaid. So vote Plaid still get Labour has some merit as a slogan
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,496

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
    As I've said, I've not stopped hosting exchange students and we send around 20 of our final year pharmacy students overseas for a semester despite not being in Eramus. I think its more about funding for the kids to do it - it can be expensive (you need a house in the UK which either means paying twice for accommodation or subletting, then there is the travel etc). Its not inherently bad, but i do wish people would stop thinking its the only possible way for students to study overseas. Its a bit like regarding the RussellGroup as the best universities simply because they say they are (but what of Bath, a 10 ten Uni in every survey?)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 57,143
    Our University sector is very strong but in a serious financial situation having over expanded and having become too reliant on overseas students. Right now we are seeing waves of redundancies and possible closures. Is Erasmus really the best use for £570m? How many people in the UK will be denied a University education from that choice?

    My daughter did a year in the Netherlands with Erasmus. She enjoyed it immensely but the longer term benefits are a lot less clear. It was also interesting to see her cohort. I think she was definitely one of the poorer participants and the weighting to privileged private school kids was very high.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 47,095
    edited December 17
    Re the recent discussion of Nimbyism not being specifically a LD thing, here are some Tory Nimbies [edit] objecting to a major UK-wide project - in comparison the SNP ones are trying to go for mitigation.

    Slightly surprisingly, the Tory lead Nimby is quoting from Burns' words on Edward of England and Bannockburn, though tbf I'm not quite sure if he realises it.

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/25703365.moray-council-objects-186-kilometre-ssen-powerline/?ref=eb&nid=1948&block=article_block_a&u=f140ec39d500193051a33e140c12bd95&date=161225
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 10,261
    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    Sadly, I just can't see how Buttigieg gets through the primaries in the South.

    Buttigieg needs to first explain why he repeatedly lied about Biden's fitness for office.

    He can then explain what he achieved himself as transport secretary for four years.
    You'll be going on about Hunter Biden next.
    None of that is in the slightest bit relevant to Democratic primaries in three years time.

    Assuming the US still has a democracy (not 100% guaranteed), the record of the current administration will be uppermost in voters minds, and whoever has the best shot at uniting the Democrats is likely to get the nomination.

    I doubt that will be Harris, and on current form, it might just be Newsom. He's not exactly adored by the Democratic base, but he's getting traction for leading the opposition to Trump. Quite what he does after leaving the governor's office at the end of 2026 is an interesting question.
    After four years of Trump, the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate. Harris isn’t that person.
    I don't think Harris is the best choice for the Democrats in 2028, but I don't think it's fair to say she can't be a unifying candidate. She's in the middle of some of the party's internal debates. She has some gravitas as a former VP and candidate. She would be more of a unifying candidate than Newsom or AOC, two other names mentioned in this discussion.

    Also, do the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate? The Republicans didn't win in 2024 with a unifying candidate. They won with about the least unifying candidate in the history of US Presidential elections. Maybe the Democrats need a firebrand candidate who's good on social media (a role AOC and Newsom are both auditioning for). Whoever they pick, the Republicans and Musk's Twitter will pump out the claim that they are a dangerous woke obsessed radical!
    If Trump and Vance's approval rating is below 45% in 2028 the Democrats will likely win the presidency whoever they nominate.

    If Trump gets his approval rating back up to 45-50% then they likely need a centrist charismatic candidate to have a chance
    If the Democrats think they can just pick whoever they want because Trump's ratings are poor there is a good chance they will lose.

    You'd think they might try a safety first approach but that doesn't seem to be their mentality right now. If the Republicans can win with a divider why can't we?
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    edited December 17
    HYUFD said:

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Either way a Plaid FM looks likely even if Reform won most Welsh seats, though I doubt the voteshares change much now so Labour will likely remain in power as minority partners with Plaid. So vote Plaid still get Labour has some merit as a slogan
    If Ref and PC are close then it might come down to the efficiency of the Tory and Lab votes on low double figures as to who can form a government. I personally think its very unlikely the LDs and Greens get more than 4 seats between them, so its then down to Lab and Con 'converting in sixth' away from their 'bankers'
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 69,273
    Socialist who was expelled from Labour, favours Corbynism, likes 'The King of the North', believes Wes Streeting is privatising the NHS and thinks the employment rights bill is too weak has just been elected to lead UNISON.

    Another headache for Starmer.
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 812

    HYUFD said:

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Either way a Plaid FM looks likely even if Reform won most Welsh seats, though I doubt the voteshares change much now so Labour will likely remain in power as minority partners with Plaid. So vote Plaid still get Labour has some merit as a slogan
    If Ref and PC are close then it might come down to the efficiency of the Tory and Lab votes on low double figures as to who can form a government. I personally think its very unlikely the LDs and Greens get more than 4 seats between them, so its then down to Lab and Con 'converting in sixth' away from their 'bankers'
    Even if Reform manage to be the largest party, it is difficult to see how they could form a government as only Cons will work with them - and that is not certain.

    Plaid have the advantage of having three potential suitors.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280
    edited December 17
    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    We need a comparator on that.

    The requested contribution for 2021 that the UK Govt walked away from was £600 million per annum: *

    Under Erasmus+, the UK already contributed significantly more than we got out in the form of receipts, and the only terms of offer for continued participation would have required an annual gross contribution of £600 million, or a net contribution in the region of £2 billion over the course of the programme.

    £600 million a year in 2027 with 2021->2027 inflation of 30% (about right) would be £780 million pro-rata, so £570 million is a like for like reduction of 27%.

    Is that a good deal? I think that probably depends on how well we fill our quota of 100k students.

    Back in 2020 there was funding for 55.7k students to be involved, and we sent 10k and received 16k. It's up to us to use it fully. I think in that case it will be good value, especially in undermining the xenophobia that poisons our politics.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg4ng7ee9vwo

    * https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2021-07-12/HL1883/
  • eekeek Posts: 32,172

    Socialist who was expelled from Labour, favours Corbynism, likes 'The King of the North', believes Wes Streeting is privatising the NHS and thinks the employment rights bill is too weak has just been elected to lead UNISON.

    Another headache for Starmer.

    I have to ask in what way the employment rights bill is too weak - the final result has been designed to avoid a lot of issues that strong rights in the EU have created over the years.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    edited December 17
    Penddu2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Either way a Plaid FM looks likely even if Reform won most Welsh seats, though I doubt the voteshares change much now so Labour will likely remain in power as minority partners with Plaid. So vote Plaid still get Labour has some merit as a slogan
    If Ref and PC are close then it might come down to the efficiency of the Tory and Lab votes on low double figures as to who can form a government. I personally think its very unlikely the LDs and Greens get more than 4 seats between them, so its then down to Lab and Con 'converting in sixth' away from their 'bankers'
    Even if Reform manage to be the largest party, it is difficult to see how they could form a government as only Cons will work with them - and that is not certain.

    Plaid have the advantage of having three potential suitors.
    Oh Plaid are favourites for sure.
    But the sixth places are vital. The more Con or Lab crawl above 10% the more they will pick up - getting lucky in 2 or 3 might be the difference.
    LDs on 4 is too high on 6% though imo. Ill be amazed if they get more than 2 - one in Cardiff (east), one in Brecon etc

    Edit - and FWIW i expect the Tories to tell Reform to do one. Although if holding balance theyd probably let Reform fall apart in minority
  • tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
    The £570m is the membership fee.
    Taking money from the working class and giving it to the children of the middle classes.
    For the first time in my life I am contemplating voting Labour.

    Slowly but surely Starmer is unravelling Brexit.
  • Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Do you have a link please?
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 812
    edited December 17
    On the Welsh polling, this was a sample size of 2500 so more accurate than the usual 1000.

    In the new voting system, a lot can depend on the sixth seat which might come down to a handful of votes. There are a number of seat predictors out there but the best in my opinion is the Jac Larner one as it also gives the 7th seat prediction, and if you recalculate using say 55% chance for 6th seat and 45% chance for 7th seat you can see an interesting spread. One for the anoraks.....
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Do you have a link please?
    https://x.com/i/status/2001181075742023857

  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
    The £570m is the membership fee.
    Taking money from the working class and giving it to the children of the middle classes.
    For the first time in my life I am contemplating voting Labour.

    Slowly but surely Starmer is unravelling Brexit.
    I was going to ask how well that would work in Sheffield Hallam, which I think is the relevant bit of Derbyshire.

    But I see you already have a Labour MP. :smiley:
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 812

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    That seat projection looks overly generous to LDs to me
    I just realised i have Green & LD projections reversed. Should be Green 4, LD 3
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 26,208

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
    100,000 students getting grants typically around £3k would be half of it.
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,104
    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    Those middle class kids need their gap year dossing in Europe
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    edited December 17
    Penddu2 said:

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    That seat projection looks overly generous to LDs to me
    I just realised i have Green & LD projections reversed. Should be Green 4, LD 3
    Fair enough, presumably the 3 LDs are the duos including Cardiff E, Brecon and Ceredigion.
    Im anticipating them winning a seat in the first two
    Greens in Cardiff South but i doubt theyll get much more, maybe one, at best two more
    Tory should definitely get one in each of Monmouth, Clwyd, Conwy, Pembroke, Vale and Flint/Wrexham plus 2 to 3 more
    Labour in Cardiff and all Valley pairs plus one or two (or 3 or 4 lol)

    PC/Reform the rest
  • TazTaz Posts: 23,104
    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    Tax rises going on foreign students now.

    Erasmus was a very one-sided scheme in the first place, they should be paying the UK for us to join.
    Good old SKS. Forensic as ever.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,154

    HYUFD said:

    Nigelb said:

    Fishing said:

    I think Trump's dire performance as President is in danger of making us forget what a dismal candidate Harris was. She never seemed to say why she wanted to be President, had no original or inspiring ideas and, when given the chance to put her point across, actively fled from the media.

    As I've said before, Democrats win when they have a charismatic bullshitter who inspires the young and the left without terrifying the centre and the middle-aged then lets them down in office - see Kennedy, Clinton, Obama. Trump may be so unpopular by 2028 that even Harris will win, or maybe she will be able to fake enough charisma, but the Democrats would be unwise to bank on that.

    For all their faults Kennedy, Clinton, & Obama were three of the most outstanding political leaders of my lifetime. The only potential candidate coming anywhere near now is Buttigieg.

    What do you think?
    Sadly, I just can't see how Buttigieg gets through the primaries in the South.

    Buttigieg needs to first explain why he repeatedly lied about Biden's fitness for office.

    He can then explain what he achieved himself as transport secretary for four years.
    You'll be going on about Hunter Biden next.
    None of that is in the slightest bit relevant to Democratic primaries in three years time.

    Assuming the US still has a democracy (not 100% guaranteed), the record of the current administration will be uppermost in voters minds, and whoever has the best shot at uniting the Democrats is likely to get the nomination.

    I doubt that will be Harris, and on current form, it might just be Newsom. He's not exactly adored by the Democratic base, but he's getting traction for leading the opposition to Trump. Quite what he does after leaving the governor's office at the end of 2026 is an interesting question.
    After four years of Trump, the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate. Harris isn’t that person.
    I don't think Harris is the best choice for the Democrats in 2028, but I don't think it's fair to say she can't be a unifying candidate. She's in the middle of some of the party's internal debates. She has some gravitas as a former VP and candidate. She would be more of a unifying candidate than Newsom or AOC, two other names mentioned in this discussion.

    Also, do the Democrats need to find a unifying candidate? The Republicans didn't win in 2024 with a unifying candidate. They won with about the least unifying candidate in the history of US Presidential elections. Maybe the Democrats need a firebrand candidate who's good on social media (a role AOC and Newsom are both auditioning for). Whoever they pick, the Republicans and Musk's Twitter will pump out the claim that they are a dangerous woke obsessed radical!
    If Trump and Vance's approval rating is below 45% in 2028 the Democrats will likely win the presidency whoever they nominate.

    If Trump gets his approval rating back up to 45-50% then they likely need a centrist charismatic candidate to have a chance
    If the Democrats think they can just pick whoever they want because Trump's ratings are poor there is a good chance they will lose.

    You'd think they might try a safety first approach but that doesn't seem to be their mentality right now. If the Republicans can win with a divider why can't we?
    Yes and as I said if Trump's ratings remain under 45% even AOC could probably win in 2028
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,358
    DavidL said:

    Our University sector is very strong but in a serious financial situation having over expanded and having become too reliant on overseas students. Right now we are seeing waves of redundancies and possible closures. Is Erasmus really the best use for £570m? How many people in the UK will be denied a University education from that choice?

    My daughter did a year in the Netherlands with Erasmus. She enjoyed it immensely but the longer term benefits are a lot less clear. It was also interesting to see her cohort. I think she was definitely one of the poorer participants and the weighting to privileged private school kids was very high.

    Interesting, that latter point.

    The Scottish universities' admissions policies is weighted to favour applicants from less successful schools in Scotland. So you can get in with lower grades.

    Sounds like it might help kids from poorer or less supportive backgrounds?

    In fact, in the town I know well, it works in favour of the kids who have parents who pay for private tuition. Pretty well all the kids who have been offered places at the "ancients" (St Andrews, Edinburgh etc) have been tutored to pass the exams they need for medicine, law, etc.

    The law of unintended consequences.

    And, of course, the free tuition fees, which are supposed to help disadvantaged kinds is, actually, overwhelmingly trousered by well-to-do middle-class families.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,358

    Penddu2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Either way a Plaid FM looks likely even if Reform won most Welsh seats, though I doubt the voteshares change much now so Labour will likely remain in power as minority partners with Plaid. So vote Plaid still get Labour has some merit as a slogan
    If Ref and PC are close then it might come down to the efficiency of the Tory and Lab votes on low double figures as to who can form a government. I personally think its very unlikely the LDs and Greens get more than 4 seats between them, so its then down to Lab and Con 'converting in sixth' away from their 'bankers'
    Even if Reform manage to be the largest party, it is difficult to see how they could form a government as only Cons will work with them - and that is not certain.

    Plaid have the advantage of having three potential suitors.
    Oh Plaid are favourites for sure.
    But the sixth places are vital. The more Con or Lab crawl above 10% the more they will pick up - getting lucky in 2 or 3 might be the difference.
    LDs on 4 is too high on 6% though imo. Ill be amazed if they get more than 2 - one in Cardiff (east), one in Brecon etc

    Edit - and FWIW i expect the Tories to tell Reform to do one. Although if holding balance theyd probably let Reform fall apart in minority
    Doubt Welsh Tories will be all that keen to deals with the Nathan Gill party.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769
    Wonder if we will get any year end MRPs. More in Common today at Ref 29, Lab 21, Con 20, LD 12 Green 11 would have a LOT of nail biters
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,884

    tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    £570mn a year for Erasmus?! I see the Chagos negotiators have already found a new job in government.

    I have no problem re-joining Eramus but it seems strange that our granddaughter spent her penultimate Leeds degree course in 2024 in Turin University so what is the difference that will cost £570million pa ?
    The £570m is the membership fee.
    Taking money from the working class and giving it to the children of the middle classes.
    For the first time in my life I am contemplating voting Labour.

    Slowly but surely Starmer is unravelling Brexit.
    Erasmus is a euro-federalist creation machine so money well spent.

    I enjoyed it a lot. I got to spend a year in Marseilles instead of Durham. I learned shitloads about French literature and culture while taking massive amounts of PEDs and racing as semi-pro cyclist.
  • Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Do you have a link please?
    https://x.com/i/status/2001181075742023857

    Labour at 10% in Wales is utterly devastating for them but well earned
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,358
    Carnyx said:

    Re the recent discussion of Nimbyism not being specifically a LD thing, here are some Tory Nimbies [edit] objecting to a major UK-wide project - in comparison the SNP ones are trying to go for mitigation.

    Slightly surprisingly, the Tory lead Nimby is quoting from Burns' words on Edward of England and Bannockburn, though tbf I'm not quite sure if he realises it.

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/25703365.moray-council-objects-186-kilometre-ssen-powerline/?ref=eb&nid=1948&block=article_block_a&u=f140ec39d500193051a33e140c12bd95&date=161225

    Which Tory is it? And what's the quote? (Paywalled, I'm afraid)
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769

    Penddu2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Either way a Plaid FM looks likely even if Reform won most Welsh seats, though I doubt the voteshares change much now so Labour will likely remain in power as minority partners with Plaid. So vote Plaid still get Labour has some merit as a slogan
    If Ref and PC are close then it might come down to the efficiency of the Tory and Lab votes on low double figures as to who can form a government. I personally think its very unlikely the LDs and Greens get more than 4 seats between them, so its then down to Lab and Con 'converting in sixth' away from their 'bankers'
    Even if Reform manage to be the largest party, it is difficult to see how they could form a government as only Cons will work with them - and that is not certain.

    Plaid have the advantage of having three potential suitors.
    Oh Plaid are favourites for sure.
    But the sixth places are vital. The more Con or Lab crawl above 10% the more they will pick up - getting lucky in 2 or 3 might be the difference.
    LDs on 4 is too high on 6% though imo. Ill be amazed if they get more than 2 - one in Cardiff (east), one in Brecon etc

    Edit - and FWIW i expect the Tories to tell Reform to do one. Although if holding balance theyd probably let Reform fall apart in minority
    Doubt Welsh Tories will be all that keen to deals with the Nathan Gill party.
    Like i said, let them fall apart as a mInority and invite the voters back to a real right of centre party in the wreckage
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 21,496

    DavidL said:

    Our University sector is very strong but in a serious financial situation having over expanded and having become too reliant on overseas students. Right now we are seeing waves of redundancies and possible closures. Is Erasmus really the best use for £570m? How many people in the UK will be denied a University education from that choice?

    My daughter did a year in the Netherlands with Erasmus. She enjoyed it immensely but the longer term benefits are a lot less clear. It was also interesting to see her cohort. I think she was definitely one of the poorer participants and the weighting to privileged private school kids was very high.

    Interesting, that latter point.

    The Scottish universities' admissions policies is weighted to favour applicants from less successful schools in Scotland. So you can get in with lower grades.

    Sounds like it might help kids from poorer or less supportive backgrounds?

    In fact, in the town I know well, it works in favour of the kids who have parents who pay for private tuition. Pretty well all the kids who have been offered places at the "ancients" (St Andrews, Edinburgh etc) have been tutored to pass the exams they need for medicine, law, etc.

    The law of unintended consequences.

    And, of course, the free tuition fees, which are supposed to help disadvantaged kinds is, actually, overwhelmingly trousered by well-to-do middle-class families.
    We offer lower grade entry to kids from poor backgrounds (essentially based on the postcode being in a deprived area).

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 132,154
    edited December 17

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Do you have a link please?
    https://x.com/i/status/2001181075742023857

    Labour at 10% in Wales is utterly devastating for them but well earned
    They would still be back in government as junior partner to Plaid, only a vote for Reform or the Conservatives can definitely remove Labour from power in Wales
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 14,769

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Do you have a link please?
    https://x.com/i/status/2001181075742023857

    Labour at 10% in Wales is utterly devastating for them but well earned
    And thats assuming the remaining fools turn out.
    Labour fourth in seats within reach
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,358

    DavidL said:

    Our University sector is very strong but in a serious financial situation having over expanded and having become too reliant on overseas students. Right now we are seeing waves of redundancies and possible closures. Is Erasmus really the best use for £570m? How many people in the UK will be denied a University education from that choice?

    My daughter did a year in the Netherlands with Erasmus. She enjoyed it immensely but the longer term benefits are a lot less clear. It was also interesting to see her cohort. I think she was definitely one of the poorer participants and the weighting to privileged private school kids was very high.

    Interesting, that latter point.

    The Scottish universities' admissions policies is weighted to favour applicants from less successful schools in Scotland. So you can get in with lower grades.

    Sounds like it might help kids from poorer or less supportive backgrounds?

    In fact, in the town I know well, it works in favour of the kids who have parents who pay for private tuition. Pretty well all the kids who have been offered places at the "ancients" (St Andrews, Edinburgh etc) have been tutored to pass the exams they need for medicine, law, etc.

    The law of unintended consequences.

    And, of course, the free tuition fees, which are supposed to help disadvantaged kinds is, actually, overwhelmingly trousered by well-to-do middle-class families.
    We offer lower grade entry to kids from poor backgrounds (essentially based on the postcode being in a deprived area).

    That can work if you're talking about REALLY poor areas, such as Central Belt schemes, where there is little variation across the postcode. In more mixed communities, not so much.
  • HYUFD said:

    Penddu2 said:

    I dont think anyone has commented on latest YouGov opinion poll from Wales for Senedd elections.

    Plaid 33%
    Reform 30%
    Labour 10% !!!
    Conservative 10%
    Green 9%
    LibDem 6%

    This would give (around):
    Plaid 39 seats
    Reform 34 seats
    Labour 10 seats
    Conservatives 6 seats
    LibDem 4 seats
    Green 3 seats

    The finishing line (in new 96 member Senedd) is 49,

    So Plaid & Lab = 49
    Reform & Con = 40

    But with a small movement in seats it might be possible for Plaid to form a coalition with Green & LD...consigning Labour to the back benches. Popcorn supplies on order....

    Do you have a link please?
    https://x.com/i/status/2001181075742023857

    Labour at 10% in Wales is utterly devastating for them but well earned
    They would still be back in government as junior partner to Plaid, only a vote for Reform or the Conservatives can definitely remove Labour from power in Wales
    We don't know just how much Plaid would want to be associated with labour in Wales
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,706
    Accidental racism from Starmer.

    https://x.com/lewis_goodall/status/2001262534545092623

    Keir Starmer: "I have a Christmas message for Reform. If mysterious men from the east come bearing gifts...this time, report it to the police."
  • MattWMattW Posts: 31,280
    MelonB said:

    The tyranny of low expectations continues to plague British discourse on education. A class system that’s been pickled into a rigid dogma over the decades.

    “Higher education is only for the middle class therefore Erasmus is taking from the workers to give to the bourgeoisie” is a sentiment I suspect you would only find in this country.

    The key question is whether it is a true, or merely a convenient nostrum.
Sign In or Register to comment.