Skip to content

Kemi Badenoch has made the Tory Party more the party of Remain than Leave – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 13,256
edited May 26 in General
Kemi Badenoch has made the Tory Party more the party of Remain than Leave – politicalbetting.com

It’ll be interesting how Kemi Badenoch develops policies to reflect the new reality, this is one poll but the changes from the Tory coalition from 2017 onwards.

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,829
    edited May 26
    First...

    ...time the temperature in the UK has reached 35 degC in May,
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 9,668
    edited May 26
    "Remain" is is soo 2016. It's not an option now
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,923
    Does that not leave her in something of a strategic bind ?

    It's possibly time for Labour to embrace rejoin (and certainly for the LibDems), and any such thing would leave the Tories trying for an uncomfortable straddle. They can't compete with Farage as leavers (and would only alienate half their remaining support if they tried), but equally, they need to win back votes on the right.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,568
    Everyone voted for their own personal unicorn version of Brexit - which means it's not been delivered.

    And the only way you will get your own personal unicorn version of Brexit is to vote for Reform which is why those voting are shifting in that direction.

    The question then becomes what happens if Reform win an election and fail to deliver (remember that delivering what people want is going to be impossible).
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,829
    There's a bigger slice of Leavers in the Labour voter base than the membership, that's for sure.

    No other active members in our branch have outed themselves as Leave voters.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,937
    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,937
    Erro in the header - should read Nigel Farage rather than Kemi Badenoch.

    Although she did expel Jenrick before he could jump ship.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,568
    edited May 26
    duplicate???
  • eekeek Posts: 34,568
    edited May 26
    Nigelb said:

    Does that not leave her in something of a strategic bind ?

    It's possibly time for Labour to embrace rejoin (and certainly for the LibDems), and any such thing would leave the Tories trying for an uncomfortable straddle. They can't compete with Farage as leavers (and would only alienate half their remaining support if they tried), but equally, they need to win back votes on the right.

    Kemi is in an impossible situation, the party has lost a set of voters who are not likely to return to them until Reform has burnt itself out.

    The question to which the answer is unknown is how does Reform burn itself up or do we now have 2 right wing parties one far more militant than the previous single party..
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,807
    edited May 26
    As I have often repeated, the Tories won’t get back into the game until they return to their historical position of pragmatic pro-Europeanism. The findings of this poll should give sensible Tories, such as any remain, food for thought.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,807
    edited May 26

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    Random variation in weather has always been a thing, and over a long enough period you’re going to get some extreme events. The issue with climate change is that these rare, extreme events are becoming commonplace.

    Here in Italy, they are saying that July temperatures have arrived early, in May. But I was here in May 2022 when exactly the same thing happened.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,397
    eek said:

    Nigelb said:

    Does that not leave her in something of a strategic bind ?

    It's possibly time for Labour to embrace rejoin (and certainly for the LibDems), and any such thing would leave the Tories trying for an uncomfortable straddle. They can't compete with Farage as leavers (and would only alienate half their remaining support if they tried), but equally, they need to win back votes on the right.

    Kemi is in an impossible situation, the party has lost a set of voters who are not likely to return to them until Reform has burnt itself out.

    The question to which the answer is unknown is how does Reform burn itself up or do we now have 2 right wing parties one far more militant than the previous single party..
    Also, at the moment, there are probably enough "I voted Remain out of loyalty to Dave, I'm now happy with Leave out of loyalty to Theresa, Boris, Rishi, Kemi" Conservatives that Brexit support is still mandatory to get anywhere in the Conservative Party.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 37,445

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    I assume you are being tongue-in-cheek but +2.2°C in 62 years is quite a jump which, unsurprisingly, supports climate change theories rather than undermines them.

    No UK monthly minimum temperature records have been set this century whereas 8 out of 12 maximum records have been.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 41,035
    Having voted Remain is clearly not a deal-breaker, either for Conservative or Reform supporters.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,568
    edited May 26

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    I assume you are being tongue-in-cheek but +2.2°C in 62 years is quite a jump which, unsurprisingly, supports climate change theories rather than undermines them.

    No UK monthly minimum temperature records have been set this century whereas 8 out of 12 maximum records have been.
    For centuries we have moaned about the cold weather, the government finally deliver something we asked for and still we complain.......
    Problem is what people wish for is often found wanting when it arrives.

    Most adults will remember the crashing disappointment when as a child a toy they've hassled for for months turns out to not be as great as they thought it would be..
  • MelonBMelonB Posts: 17,570
    edited May 26

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    This one is actually pretty clear cut, because of the margin.

    There has always been “bonkers” heat, with the right synoptics. Very hot synoptic patterns don’t come around that often, though we did get close in 2005 and 2012. But since 1922 there has been roughly 1.5C of global warming. We just beat the previous record by 2.2C.

    So even if the pattern was identical to 1922 we could point to a century of warming being responsible. But the pattern is not identical. It was more extreme in both 22 and 44.

    The preponderance of extreme temperatures in recent years (last year was the hottest spring on record for example. The second hottest was 2024. The third hottest was 2017. Fourth hottest was 2020, and this spring will likely be in the top 3) is simply down to maths and the normal distribution. If you shift the mean up a degree or more you get a massive increase in frequency hot weather records and a massive decrease in frequency of cold weather records.

    Look at a year by year record of the hottest temperature of the year to see this in action. 34C used to be rare, now it’s most years.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,558
    edited May 26
    I'm surprised as many as 1 in 6 Reformies voted Remain. That slightly cuts across my take that Farage's pool is the voter coalition that delivered us Brexit and Boris. Still, it mainly is.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,937
    edited May 26
    To Benpointer:

    Well spotted! But I am expecting somebody to play the "there's always been bonkers weather!" card.

    Rather than bonkers climate.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 18,695
    Leave voters got what they wanted but are now apparently looking for ever more catastrophically stupid things to vote for. They're so angry, having won, imagine what might have happened if they'd lost!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,937

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    I assume you are being tongue-in-cheek but +2.2°C in 62 years is quite a jump which, unsurprisingly, supports climate change theories rather than undermines them.

    No UK monthly minimum temperature records have been set this century whereas 8 out of 12 maximum records have been.
    For centuries we have moaned about the cold weather, the government finally deliver something we asked for and still we complain.......
    Ornery bunch, them voters...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,937
    edited May 26

    Leave voters got what they wanted but are now apparently looking for ever more catastrophically stupid things to vote for. They're so angry, having won, imagine what might have happened if they'd lost!

    They can always cast a glance to Remainers for what 10 years of butt-hurt looks like...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 64,439
    kinabalu said:

    I'm surprised as many as 1 in 6 Reformies voted Remain. That slightly cuts across my take that Farage's pool is the voter coalition that delivered us Brexit and Boris. Still, it mainly is.

    False “recall” of past votes is a thing. Which pollsters have previously noted.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 18,695

    Leave voters got what they wanted but are now apparently looking for ever more catastrophically stupid things to vote for. They're so angry, having won, imagine what might have happened if they'd lost!

    They can always cast a glance to Remainers for what 10 years of butt-hurt looks like...
    I reckon Remainers are generally of a sunnier disposition despite losing. The only butt hurt I get is from riding my bike.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 16,855
    Afternoon all :)

    FIrst, thanks for the commisserations from all those in the provinces - we Londoners will have to make sure your tribute to the capital is doubled next year for your impertinence and condescension.

    In all seriousness, this is July/August heat, not May heat and the thought of 40+ (or 100+ in old money) in July or August for several days isn't easy to contemplate. It'll happen one day - may be not this year, may be not next but it will happen and we're not prepared.

    The 2019 Johnson GE winning coalition was made up of 75% of the 2016 LEAVE vote (roughly 36% of the electorate) and 20% of those who voted REMAIN (roughly 9,5%) but couldn't contemplate the idea of Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister.

    The Conservatives polled 47% in England in that election - at the 2024 GE that was 26% and according to the current YouGov sub sample for England 19%.

    That would confirm the thought the Conservative core is a mix of 2016 Leavers and Remainers and possibly in fairly equal shares which perhaps was more reflective of the Conservative vote than the members and especially the activists who seemed to be strongly pro-LEAVE.

    I know on here even a decade on the 2016 Referendum is viewed as a defining political event but you could argue other events have played a not insignificant role in how politics has aligned or re-aligned subsequently.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,558
    edited May 26

    Leave voters got what they wanted but are now apparently looking for ever more catastrophically stupid things to vote for. They're so angry, having won, imagine what might have happened if they'd lost!

    The 2nd Referendum proposition would have transformed itself from anti-democratic outrage to absolute necessity to maintain the trust of the people.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,073
    Re header: This can change swiftly. There's a lot of competition for the Leaver vote and little of it represents sanity. The Tory party was basically on the fence with regards to Brexit. The nation was similarly positioned. Rational people now seem to be of much the same view.

    Natural party of government!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,923

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    June 44 was cold and wet.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,558

    kinabalu said:

    I'm surprised as many as 1 in 6 Reformies voted Remain. That slightly cuts across my take that Farage's pool is the voter coalition that delivered us Brexit and Boris. Still, it mainly is.

    False “recall” of past votes is a thing. Which pollsters have previously noted.
    Could be some of that, yes. Some of the less *committed* Leave voters might, in the light of how it's gone, decide that they didn't do it. Which is fair enough.
  • MelonBMelonB Posts: 17,570
    Nigelb said:

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    June 44 was cold and wet.
    Indeed famously so. First numerical weather prediction involving a room full of people passing each other equations.

    Early June also looking relatively cool and wet this year. Just probably 1.5C less cool and wet than it would have been.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 16,855
    Omnium said:

    Re header: This can change swiftly. There's a lot of competition for the Leaver vote and little of it represents sanity. The Tory party was basically on the fence with regards to Brexit. The nation was similarly positioned. Rational people now seem to be of much the same view.

    Natural party of government!

    No, it wasn't "on the fence", it was more like impaled on a spike.

    Cameron had to allow party members to campaign against him in a public vote and the only way he could do that was to call the party "neutral". He knew what would happen because he had seen what the 1975 Referendum had done to Wilson's Labour Party and set it on the road to the schism of 1981 and 18 years in opposition.

    Winning the 2015 election must have seemed like the nightmare scenario and having to make the referendum an in/out question rather than a vote on revised terms of membership must have been the worst of all worlds and the defeat ten years ago next month a blessed relief.

    Of course, you could equally argue Johnson reunited and created a New Conservative Party in 2019 but circumstances conspired against him and drove large elements of his coalition back to the waiting arms of Farage whose Reform Party isn't UKIP 2.0 but the Johnson Conservative Party Mark 2.0.
  • First...

    ...time the temperature in the UK has reached 35 degC in May,

    I very much doubt it. Obviously before 1752 today would be 14 May so very likely there would have been hotter days equivalent to the first 11 days of June New Style. And that is before you start looking at the archaeological and documentary evidence which suggests the climate was better in early Roman era and presumably the 12th and 14th C, but not the 13th. The Romans and the Norwegian Vikings could grow some form of corn, not oats at 650 ft here. My great uncle couldn't during the War. Were they better hubandmen that my great uncle, probably not.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 10,245

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    I assume you are being tongue-in-cheek but +2.2°C in 62 years is quite a jump which, unsurprisingly, supports climate change theories rather than undermines them.

    No UK monthly minimum temperature records have been set this century whereas 8 out of 12 maximum records have been.
    For centuries we have moaned about the cold weather, the government finally deliver something we asked for and still we complain.......
    It's too hot. It shouldn't be allowed.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 21,699
    FPT…
    theProle said:

    theProle said:

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/robkenyonreform/status/2059234671007789458

    I used to respect you Rupert.

    Restore have never wanted anything to do with this area. But now someone born with a silver spoon in their mouth is trying to lie about the only working class local man in the race.

    I want net negative immigration.

    He’s a moron . With an ageing population and low birth rate whose going to pay for the increase in pensioners.
    Ah, yes. The immigration ponzi scheme. "Keep importing more people, because without population growth, we can't afford to look after the old people already here."

    It's a complete falacy, because it doesn't account for the infrastructure costs of increasing the population. Every extra person has a one off infrastructure cost when they arrive, needing extra infrastructure putting in place for their housing, transport, hospitals, schools, water, electricity etc, etc.

    Currently, we've got a country with the infrastructure fit for ~55 milion people, and a reality of ~70 million people.
    It will be much cheaper to prevent immigration almost entirely and let the population drift back down to ~55 million over the next 20-30 years, than build all the missing infrastructure.

    It will be much easier to solve the house price crisis by reducing demand (it will take time, but it will happen) than by allowing Barretts to concrete over every square inch of the countryside. It would be cheaper not to have to build HS2, because rail demand stopped increasing. It would be cheaper not to have to build loads of new reservoirs, because water demand (broadly static per person) stops increasing. Etc etc.

    This is of course not racism. It's economics. But the cheap nanny's and Deliveroo every night crowd like shouting racism rather than engage with the argument, because their case is very weak.
    The logical conclusion of your line of reasoning is that we should have a population of zero, then there will be no infrastructure costs and everything will be great. This is silly and demonstrates the flaw in your reasoning.

    What you've missed is that every extra person generates economic value, which is enough (on average) to pay for their required infrastructure costs. Indeed, with efficiency savings resulting from larger numbers, each new person requires a lower per capita infrastructure cost.

    Your analysis also makes no distinction between new people arriving through immigration and new people being born. (Generally, the people arriving through immigration have lower lifetime costs as we don't have to pay for their early years and education.)

    Your analysis also misses the importance of the age mix of the population. A population of 55 million but with 25% over 65 (a possible future for the UK) is very different to a population of 55 million but with 15% over 65 (which was the UK's past, 40 years ago, approximately). The latter is much more sustainable.
    I think you've missed that I'm primarily talking about infrastructure capex costs, because that's elephant in the room the pro immigration lobby misses.

    If the population count is stable, there is very little need for new infrastructure.

    Take water, because it's an easy example. If an average person uses say 10,000 gallons a year (I've no idea of the actual qty!) there will be an amount of reservoir capacity required to support that over the dryest part of the summer. We built enough reservoir capacity for this times 55-60 million people years ago. It's done, dusted, paid for. There are still ongoing costs - pumping, repairs, maintenance, but we're not having to keep buying up land to build dams and flood valleys to keep supplying water to those 55-60 million people.

    Add ten million extra people to the mix, and suddenly we don't have enough capacity any more. Short term we fudge things with demand management eg hosepipe bans, but the only real solution is to build more capacity. And that is hideously expensive.

    The same thing applies to roads, schools, housing, electricity etc. As we increase the population, we increase the amount of physical infrastructure required, which means that every immigrant comes with a massive one off cost. Most of them will never earn enough in their lifetimes to pay for it.

    This would apply just as much if we had a massive baby boom working through the system - the effects are just as undesirable - but we don't, so it's immigration that's our problem.

    To make things worse, because we can't afford to buy all the extra infrastructure we need, we're perennially trying to save money by running our systems at 110% capacity, then wondering why all our public services are rubbish.

    There would be no advantage to allowing the population to drop below much the numbers for which we have the infrastructure, as that Capex is already spent.

    None of this is new - China went for the one child policy in the 70s because they realised it was far cheaper to reduce the population than build the missing infrastructure. It was cruel and heartless, and they royally stuffed it up by allowing sex selective abortion (thus creating a whopping male-female imbalance, which is causing them huge social problems now), but the core numbers logic worked. We don't have any need to be so cruel and heartless, demographics are naturally going to do this for us, providing we don't just fill the gap in with immigration.

    At some point, when we're down to say a population 50 million, we may want to seriously look at increasing immigration again if the birth rate remains low - but that's a problem to consider once we've got the population numbers back to a sensible level again, not an argument to keep increasing population numbers now.
    If the population count is stable, there is still need for new infrastructure. Because the old infrastructure wears out. It depends precisely what we’re talking about, but you need to regularly build new or do major refurbishments to old schools and hospitals. And for most things, opex is much bigger than capex anyway.

    The problem with Britain’s infrastructure is not population growth. It’s chronic underinvestment.

    Your analysis of China is nonsense. The plan in the 1970s was to slow the rate of population growth, not to shrink the population. It’s only just started shrinking now because the fertility rate has dropped much more than expected.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,314
    stodge said:

    Omnium said:

    Re header: This can change swiftly. There's a lot of competition for the Leaver vote and little of it represents sanity. The Tory party was basically on the fence with regards to Brexit. The nation was similarly positioned. Rational people now seem to be of much the same view.

    Natural party of government!

    No, it wasn't "on the fence", it was more like impaled on a spike.

    Cameron had to allow party members to campaign against him in a public vote and the only way he could do that was to call the party "neutral". He knew what would happen because he had seen what the 1975 Referendum had done to Wilson's Labour Party and set it on the road to the schism of 1981 and 18 years in opposition.

    Winning the 2015 election must have seemed like the nightmare scenario and having to make the referendum an in/out question rather than a vote on revised terms of membership must have been the worst of all worlds and the defeat ten years ago next month a blessed relief.

    Of course, you could equally argue Johnson reunited and created a New Conservative Party in 2019 but circumstances conspired against him and drove large elements of his coalition back to the waiting arms of Farage whose Reform Party isn't UKIP 2.0 but the Johnson Conservative Party Mark 2.0.
    Cameron should have realised he needed to be neutral too in order to prevent the question undermining his own leadership. It wouldn't have taken much flexibility to say that his deal was the next version of EU membership available, but also talked up our prospects outside the EU and left the decision up to the people.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 13,073
    stodge said:

    Omnium said:

    Re header: This can change swiftly. There's a lot of competition for the Leaver vote and little of it represents sanity. The Tory party was basically on the fence with regards to Brexit. The nation was similarly positioned. Rational people now seem to be of much the same view.

    Natural party of government!

    No, it wasn't "on the fence", it was more like impaled on a spike.

    Cameron had to allow party members to campaign against him in a public vote and the only way he could do that was to call the party "neutral". He knew what would happen because he had seen what the 1975 Referendum had done to Wilson's Labour Party and set it on the road to the schism of 1981 and 18 years in opposition.

    Winning the 2015 election must have seemed like the nightmare scenario and having to make the referendum an in/out question rather than a vote on revised terms of membership must have been the worst of all worlds and the defeat ten years ago next month a blessed relief.

    Of course, you could equally argue Johnson reunited and created a New Conservative Party in 2019 but circumstances conspired against him and drove large elements of his coalition back to the waiting arms of Farage whose Reform Party isn't UKIP 2.0 but the Johnson Conservative Party Mark 2.0.
    Well I'll not argue the point. Mainly because I'm definitely and clearly on the fence for this issue too.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,923
    The United States has informed European allies it plans to significantly cut its military contributions to NATO, urging them to move quickly to close the gap, according to the German media outlet Der Spiegel.

    Alexander Velez-Green, a senior advisor and envoy for U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, briefed allies on plans during a confidential meeting last week at the NATO Headquarters in Brussels, with European officials reported to have been taken aback by the scale of the planned drawdown by the Trump Administration.

    As part of the drawdown, the U.S. Armed Forces plans to commit much fewer assets to NATO’s pool of readily available forces in the case of a conflict, significantly reducing the number of deployable drones, fighter jets, aerial refueling aircraft, strategic bomber, as well as warships, submarines and other naval assets, with a roughly one-third cut in just its fighter-aircraft contribution to forces in Europe.

    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2059272111089135836
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,558
    edited May 26
    REF = Barge atm for Macca. Trading over 4 now. Not sure what's driving it. Can't be that poll showing them 3 pts behind. That was quite good for them imo.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,937
    edited May 26
    kinabalu said:

    stodge said:

    Omnium said:

    Re header: This can change swiftly. There's a lot of competition for the Leaver vote and little of it represents sanity. The Tory party was basically on the fence with regards to Brexit. The nation was similarly positioned. Rational people now seem to be of much the same view.

    Natural party of government!

    No, it wasn't "on the fence", it was more like impaled on a spike.

    Cameron had to allow party members to campaign against him in a public vote and the only way he could do that was to call the party "neutral". He knew what would happen because he had seen what the 1975 Referendum had done to Wilson's Labour Party and set it on the road to the schism of 1981 and 18 years in opposition.

    Winning the 2015 election must have seemed like the nightmare scenario and having to make the referendum an in/out question rather than a vote on revised terms of membership must have been the worst of all worlds and the defeat ten years ago next month a blessed relief.

    Of course, you could equally argue Johnson reunited and created a New Conservative Party in 2019 but circumstances conspired against him and drove large elements of his coalition back to the waiting arms of Farage whose Reform Party isn't UKIP 2.0 but the Johnson Conservative Party Mark 2.0.
    He conspired against himself really. There was a lot of public goodwill for him as he faced the challenges of the pandemic. If he'd just avoided the habitual fecklessness and endless deceit he could have emerged in tip-top shape.
    But Prince Hal was not constitutionally set-up to become Henry V.

    He preferred fannying around with Falstaff and Doll Tearsheet.

    To the nation's detriment, but massively more so to his own standing.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,937
    Nigelb said:

    The United States has informed European allies it plans to significantly cut its military contributions to NATO, urging them to move quickly to close the gap, according to the German media outlet Der Spiegel.

    Alexander Velez-Green, a senior advisor and envoy for U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, briefed allies on plans during a confidential meeting last week at the NATO Headquarters in Brussels, with European officials reported to have been taken aback by the scale of the planned drawdown by the Trump Administration.

    As part of the drawdown, the U.S. Armed Forces plans to commit much fewer assets to NATO’s pool of readily available forces in the case of a conflict, significantly reducing the number of deployable drones, fighter jets, aerial refueling aircraft, strategic bomber, as well as warships, submarines and other naval assets, with a roughly one-third cut in just its fighter-aircraft contribution to forces in Europe.

    https://x.com/sentdefender/status/2059272111089135836

    Let's hope that ahead of the mid-terms, all those folk employed in making arms for European buyers better start selling up and moving town.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,314
    kinabalu said:

    REF = Barge atm for Macca. Trading over 4 now. Not sure what's driving it. Can't be that poll showing them 3 pts behind. That was quite good for them imo.

    Americans backing Restore?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,953

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    Do you really think a couple of hot days proves climate change is true? I think it's true, but not because of this.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 16,855

    stodge said:

    Omnium said:

    Re header: This can change swiftly. There's a lot of competition for the Leaver vote and little of it represents sanity. The Tory party was basically on the fence with regards to Brexit. The nation was similarly positioned. Rational people now seem to be of much the same view.

    Natural party of government!

    No, it wasn't "on the fence", it was more like impaled on a spike.

    Cameron had to allow party members to campaign against him in a public vote and the only way he could do that was to call the party "neutral". He knew what would happen because he had seen what the 1975 Referendum had done to Wilson's Labour Party and set it on the road to the schism of 1981 and 18 years in opposition.

    Winning the 2015 election must have seemed like the nightmare scenario and having to make the referendum an in/out question rather than a vote on revised terms of membership must have been the worst of all worlds and the defeat ten years ago next month a blessed relief.

    Of course, you could equally argue Johnson reunited and created a New Conservative Party in 2019 but circumstances conspired against him and drove large elements of his coalition back to the waiting arms of Farage whose Reform Party isn't UKIP 2.0 but the Johnson Conservative Party Mark 2.0.
    Cameron should have realised he needed to be neutral too in order to prevent the question undermining his own leadership. It wouldn't have taken much flexibility to say that his deal was the next version of EU membership available, but also talked up our prospects outside the EU and left the decision up to the people.
    Wilson of course stood above the fray but it was Heath's deal on which we were voting in 1975 and while Wilson knew hw had plenty opposed to the Common Market in his own party, he knew he could rely on the new Conservative leader and there was no stronger supporter of the Common Market in 1975 than one M. Thatcher.

    Cameron's own failure (aided and abetted by the Europeans) left him having to defend the indefensible, a status quo which no one really wanted or supported.

    His main concern was the unity of the Conservative Party and he held the party together through the vote but what happened after led to that party's demise.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 6,420
    edited May 26

    Leave voters got what they wanted but are now apparently looking for ever more catastrophically stupid things to vote for. They're so angry, having won, imagine what might have happened if they'd lost!

    They can always cast a glance to Remainers for what 10 years of butt-hurt looks like...
    The ultimate obsessive, charmless Remainer, Ted Heath, managed to sulk for 20 years after losing to Margaret Thatcher. I wonder how long he'd have sulked for if he'd been alive for the Brexit vote.

    At least a century, I'd imagine, if he'd somehow lived that long.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 25,829
    Andy_JS said:

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    Do you really think a couple of hot days proves climate change is true? I think it's true, but not because of this.
    Accumulation of evidence. Yet another data point that shows that we are fucked.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,568
    Fishing said:

    Leave voters got what they wanted but are now apparently looking for ever more catastrophically stupid things to vote for. They're so angry, having won, imagine what might have happened if they'd lost!

    They can always cast a glance to Remainers for what 10 years of butt-hurt looks like...
    The ultimate obsessive, charmless Remainer, Ted Heath, managed to sulk for 20 years after losing to Margaret Thatcher. I wonder how long he'd have sulked for if he'd been alive for the Brexit vote.

    At least a century, I'd imagine, if he'd somehow lived that long.
    As I've discovered with 1 on my Aunts spite can keep you going for a very long time..
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 51,558
    edited May 26

    kinabalu said:

    REF = Barge atm for Macca. Trading over 4 now. Not sure what's driving it. Can't be that poll showing them 3 pts behind. That was quite good for them imo.

    Americans backing Restore?
    Not much evidence if so. They're at 30. It's LAB who are shortening. I guess punters have seen that 'Andy for us' cartoon face logo, literally exploiting his face recognition advantage, and they're thinking it all looks pretty inevitable. There's no cartoon face of Scott Kenyon.

    Edit: sorry Robert Kenyon. Scott Kenyon is sitting this one out.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 29,254
    eek said:

    Fishing said:

    Leave voters got what they wanted but are now apparently looking for ever more catastrophically stupid things to vote for. They're so angry, having won, imagine what might have happened if they'd lost!

    They can always cast a glance to Remainers for what 10 years of butt-hurt looks like...
    The ultimate obsessive, charmless Remainer, Ted Heath, managed to sulk for 20 years after losing to Margaret Thatcher. I wonder how long he'd have sulked for if he'd been alive for the Brexit vote.

    At least a century, I'd imagine, if he'd somehow lived that long.
    As I've discovered with 1 on my Aunts spite can keep you going for a very long time..
    "...I think I know enough of hate
    To say that for destruction ice
    Is also great
    And would suffice..."


  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 2,571
    Kemi is very much a Remainer

    On Tuesday and Thursday

    Kemi is very much a Leaver

    On Monday and Wednesday

    On Friday she'll argue that she's not a Leaver or a Remainder, but deny she's ever said anything on the topic

    Flip flop
    Flio flop
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 10,245
    Andy_JS said:

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    Do you really think a couple of hot days proves climate change is true? I think it's true, but not because of this.
    It's further evidence, not proof.
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,652
    Brixian59 said:

    Kemi is very much a Remainer

    On Tuesday and Thursday

    Kemi is very much a Leaver

    On Monday and Wednesday

    On Friday she'll argue that she's not a Leaver or a Remainder, but deny she's ever said anything on the topic

    Flip flop
    Flio flop

    Taking a leaf out of Burnham’s book then !
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,914
    viewcode said:

    eek said:

    Fishing said:

    Leave voters got what they wanted but are now apparently looking for ever more catastrophically stupid things to vote for. They're so angry, having won, imagine what might have happened if they'd lost!

    They can always cast a glance to Remainers for what 10 years of butt-hurt looks like...
    The ultimate obsessive, charmless Remainer, Ted Heath, managed to sulk for 20 years after losing to Margaret Thatcher. I wonder how long he'd have sulked for if he'd been alive for the Brexit vote.

    At least a century, I'd imagine, if he'd somehow lived that long.
    As I've discovered with 1 on my Aunts spite can keep you going for a very long time..
    "...I think I know enough of hate
    To say that for destruction ice
    Is also great
    And would suffice..."


    https://youtu.be/HWW0F7jeV24?si=ZQS6rIQOQve3VNTA
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,533
    Andy_JS said:

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    Do you really think a couple of hot days proves climate change is true? I think it's true, but not because of this.
    The increasing regularity that maximum temperatures for months are broken, not just here but around the world is pretty convincing that we have more than an isolated heat wave.

    But simple observation helps too. My daffodils come out a couple of weeks earlier than they used to. More of my frost sensitive plants survive each winter.

    Last weeks report from the Climate Change Committee was widely ignored by our trivia obsessed media, and makes for sobering reading:

    https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/a-well-adapted-uk/
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 60,937
    Nigelb said:

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    June 44 was cold and wet.
    As the film "Pressure" will show...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,923
    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,314
    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    It's interesting that Lowe is succeeding with Restore where every other person who fell out with Farage failed.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,772
    kinabalu said:

    REF = Barge atm for Macca. Trading over 4 now. Not sure what's driving it. Can't be that poll showing them 3 pts behind. That was quite good for them imo.

    I did say there were two polls that I was aware for Makerfield, remember not all polls are published.
  • TazTaz Posts: 29,652

    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    It's interesting that Lowe is succeeding with Restore where every other person who fell out with Farage failed.
    I wonder if there is more to David Bull taking a step back than meets the eye.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 57,533

    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    It's interesting that Lowe is succeeding with Restore where every other person who fell out with Farage failed.
    Its a bit early to say that.

    Farage does have a unique talent of turning friends into arch-enemies. Well perhaps not entirely unique, but the SNP seem a distant second.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,397
    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    To be fair to Reform, it's a blooming difficult playbook to win against. There aren't many one nation/Christian Democrat parties that have sucessfully held off a challenge from the populist right.

    Reform's biggest mistake looks like being the assumption that they couldn't be outflanked on the even further right.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,568
    edited May 26

    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    To be fair to Reform, it's a blooming difficult playbook to win against. There aren't many one nation/Christian Democrat parties that have sucessfully held off a challenge from the populist right.

    Reform's biggest mistake looks like being the assumption that they couldn't be outflanked on the even further right.
    It's very hard to hit the slither of space between Reform and the National Front / Tommy 14 names - but Lowe has probably timed this perfectly especially with Musk on his side.

    After all it doesn't cost money to slightly change an algorithm so posts are hidden / promoted on X..
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 40,616
    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    So Reform treat the Restore playbook a bit like Nigel treats a £5m gift?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,314
    https://x.com/ChoukeirJ/status/2059285795588972835

    REMNANTS OF FORMER SYRIAN PRESIDENT ASSAD'S CHEMICAL WEAPONS PROGRAM RECOVERED, SYRIAN OFFICIAL

    MORE THAN 70 ROCKETS AND AERIAL BOMBS USED FOR CHEMICAL WEAPONS RECOVERED - OFFICIAL

    18 SUSPECTS FOR ALLEGED INVOLVEMENT IN PROGRAM ARRESTED - OFFICIAL

    SARIN NERVE GAS INGREDIENTS USED BY ASSAD FORCES ALSO FOUND - OFFICIAL
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,923

    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    To be fair to Reform, it's a blooming difficult playbook to win against. There aren't many one nation/Christian Democrat parties that have sucessfully held off a challenge from the populist right.

    Reform's biggest mistake looks like being the assumption that they couldn't be outflanked on the even further right.
    Reform is not a one nation party.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 9,401
    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 60,536
    Barnesian said:

    Andy_JS said:

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    Do you really think a couple of hot days proves climate change is true? I think it's true, but not because of this.
    It's further evidence, not proof.
    How about 32.8 in 1922 and 1944?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 90,923
    I don't see how Paxton survives this politically.

    Adam Hoffman has been released from jail for "good behavior."

    Hoffman is the 49-year-old Waco, TX attorney who faced life without parole for repeatedly raping a young boy, until Texas AG Ken Paxton offered him 1 day in jail and no need to register as a sex offender. A judge increased his sentence to a whopping 60 days. He got out in 30 days.

    https://x.com/QasimRashid/status/2059029444644462905
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 5,681

    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    It's interesting that Lowe is succeeding with Restore where every other person who fell out with Farage failed.
    Actually I find Mr Lowe quite impressive as a person, but that may make him quite dangerous too.
  • eekeek Posts: 34,568
    edited May 26
    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    The logical time for an election is May / October / November 2028.

    I can see Burnham targetting one then, I can't see one this year with petrol and energy prices as they currently are.

    By 2028 we will be used to them...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,772
    edited May 26
    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    Nope, Burnham was in the cabinet when Gordon Brown thought about a snap election, heck he was even mentioned in that seminal article

    We cannot be killed

    'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority'


    Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.

    It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference 2007. Somewhere in the wads of twenty somethings and thirtywouldbes jamming the chintzy Bournemouth bars long after they’re normally silent lurks the jitterbugging desperation of the Twenties before the Crash, Berlin between the wars, London as Imperial Glory died with its queen. The collective psyche of this group of individuals who’ve never had it so good has rarely been so uncertain.

    This is not a columnar conceit. I do not really have a thesis; no point to prove. I can only tentatively explain this atmosphere. But nor am I wrong. This mood is as real as the grief in the church. I am simply reporting what is here.

    Perhaps the magnitude of the moment we face is too great for us collectively to bear. Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority, and in so doing utterly shatter the glass paradigm of cyclical politics which has contained us for the century since 1906.

    This ought to herald another decade of strong, confident, consensual Labour government. Which will finally and irrevocably transform the nature of politics and civic life in Britain.

    That is a frightening responsibility. The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready.


    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 4,522
    Sean_F said:

    Having voted Remain is clearly not a deal-breaker, either for Conservative or Reform supporters.

    Does suggest that the blocks which the pundits think are immutable are a) probably more fluid than the media narrative has had us believe and b) perhaps after a decade they are finally breaking up anyway.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 5,681
    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    Given that Restore is such a new party, it seems unlikely that they could gear up quickly enough for an early election. So it would be unwise for Mr Burnham to rely on Restore splitting the Reform vote everywhere.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,397
    Nigelb said:

    I don't see how Paxton survives this politically.

    Adam Hoffman has been released from jail for "good behavior."

    Hoffman is the 49-year-old Waco, TX attorney who faced life without parole for repeatedly raping a young boy, until Texas AG Ken Paxton offered him 1 day in jail and no need to register as a sex offender. A judge increased his sentence to a whopping 60 days. He got out in 30 days.

    https://x.com/QasimRashid/status/2059029444644462905

    He's MAGA. That's all he needs.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,962
    Since you are discussing climate change, some of you may want to look at this Roger Pielke opinion piece:
    The climate apocalypse isn’t around the corner after all. That’s the upshot of a recent report from the international panel that supplies official “scenarios” to researchers, governments and banks. It turns out that the most extreme assumptions about the future — the doomsaying predictions embodied in the worst-case scenario known as RCP8.5 — are “implausible.” In their place, Dutch researcher Detlef van Vuuren and his co-authors have proposed new ones that will form the basis of the United Nations’ next major climate assessment.

    The substance of the paper, released last month, won’t shock anyone who has followed the subject scrupulously. The old scenarios described an impossibility, a world committed to the increasing consumption of coal at the expense of all other energy technologies. Scenarios based on those faulty assumptions nevertheless caught on: They dominated the assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, academic papers and media reports that warned of a looming catastrophe.
    . . .
    Based on preliminary estimates, the new scenario framework brings projected warming down sharply — from about 4.8 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels by 2100 to about 2.6 degrees. At the low end, the scenarios with the most rapid rates of emissions reduction have also been retired, affirming that the 1.5 Celsius temperature target of the 2015 Paris agreement is infeasible.
    (Links omitted.)
    source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/05/20/rcp85-climate-scenario-is-dead-good-riddance/

  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 2,571
    Farage is a bit like a Spurs team most vintages when they came to a cauldron like St Andrews on a wet Tuesday night.

    Southern bottlers, no heart for the fight.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,772

    Nigelb said:

    I don't see how Paxton survives this politically.

    Adam Hoffman has been released from jail for "good behavior."

    Hoffman is the 49-year-old Waco, TX attorney who faced life without parole for repeatedly raping a young boy, until Texas AG Ken Paxton offered him 1 day in jail and no need to register as a sex offender. A judge increased his sentence to a whopping 60 days. He got out in 30 days.

    https://x.com/QasimRashid/status/2059029444644462905

    He's MAGA. That's all he needs.
    Roy Moore though.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 5,681

    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    Nope, Burnham was in the cabinet when Gordon Brown thought about a snap election, heck he was even mentioned in that seminal article

    We cannot be killed

    'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority'


    Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.

    It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference 2007. Somewhere in the wads of twenty somethings and thirtywouldbes jamming the chintzy Bournemouth bars long after they’re normally silent lurks the jitterbugging desperation of the Twenties before the Crash, Berlin between the wars, London as Imperial Glory died with its queen. The collective psyche of this group of individuals who’ve never had it so good has rarely been so uncertain.

    This is not a columnar conceit. I do not really have a thesis; no point to prove. I can only tentatively explain this atmosphere. But nor am I wrong. This mood is as real as the grief in the church. I am simply reporting what is here.

    Perhaps the magnitude of the moment we face is too great for us collectively to bear. Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority, and in so doing utterly shatter the glass paradigm of cyclical politics which has contained us for the century since 1906.

    This ought to herald another decade of strong, confident, consensual Labour government. Which will finally and irrevocably transform the nature of politics and civic life in Britain.

    That is a frightening responsibility. The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready./i>

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
    Never fails to make me LOL.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 9,401

    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    Nope, Burnham was in the cabinet when Gordon Brown thought about a snap election, heck he was even mentioned in that seminal article

    We cannot be killed

    'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority'


    Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.

    It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference 2007. Somewhere in the wads of twenty somethings and thirtywouldbes jamming the chintzy Bournemouth bars long after they’re normally silent lurks the jitterbugging desperation of the Twenties before the Crash, Berlin between the wars, London as Imperial Glory died with its queen. The collective psyche of this group of individuals who’ve never had it so good has rarely been so uncertain.

    This is not a columnar conceit. I do not really have a thesis; no point to prove. I can only tentatively explain this atmosphere. But nor am I wrong. This mood is as real as the grief in the church. I am simply reporting what is here.

    Perhaps the magnitude of the moment we face is too great for us collectively to bear. Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority, and in so doing utterly shatter the glass paradigm of cyclical politics which has contained us for the century since 1906.

    This ought to herald another decade of strong, confident, consensual Labour government. Which will finally and irrevocably transform the nature of politics and civic life in Britain.

    That is a frightening responsibility. The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready./i>

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
    Shouldn't Brown have held that election? He might well have won and kept power longer?
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,914
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    Nope, Burnham was in the cabinet when Gordon Brown thought about a snap election, heck he was even mentioned in that seminal article

    We cannot be killed

    'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority'


    Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.

    It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference 2007. Somewhere in the wads of twenty somethings and thirtywouldbes jamming the chintzy Bournemouth bars long after they’re normally silent lurks the jitterbugging desperation of the Twenties before the Crash, Berlin between the wars, London as Imperial Glory died with its queen. The collective psyche of this group of individuals who’ve never had it so good has rarely been so uncertain.

    This is not a columnar conceit. I do not really have a thesis; no point to prove. I can only tentatively explain this atmosphere. But nor am I wrong. This mood is as real as the grief in the church. I am simply reporting what is here.

    Perhaps the magnitude of the moment we face is too great for us collectively to bear. Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority, and in so doing utterly shatter the glass paradigm of cyclical politics which has contained us for the century since 1906.

    This ought to herald another decade of strong, confident, consensual Labour government. Which will finally and irrevocably transform the nature of politics and civic life in Britain.

    That is a frightening responsibility. The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready./i>

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
    Shouldn't Brown have held that election? He might well have won and kept power longer?
    Probably. But hindsight is a wonderful thing.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,397
    AnneJGP said:

    Nigelb said:

    A sensible comment from Hodges.

    This is the incredible thing. Restore are literally running the Reform playbook page by page. And Reform are acting like they've never seen it before.
    https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/2059179790553223629

    It's interesting that Lowe is succeeding with Restore where every other person who fell out with Farage failed.
    Actually I find Mr Lowe quite impressive as a person, but that may make him quite dangerous too.
    One of the advantages we've had in recent decades is that thuggish politics has been fronted by thuggish people.

    Thuggish politics fronted by a rich, articulate old bloke in a suit is a novelty. Even Farage has an element of spivishness about him as a warning sign.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,314
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    Nope, Burnham was in the cabinet when Gordon Brown thought about a snap election, heck he was even mentioned in that seminal article

    We cannot be killed

    'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority'


    Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.

    It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference 2007. Somewhere in the wads of twenty somethings and thirtywouldbes jamming the chintzy Bournemouth bars long after they’re normally silent lurks the jitterbugging desperation of the Twenties before the Crash, Berlin between the wars, London as Imperial Glory died with its queen. The collective psyche of this group of individuals who’ve never had it so good has rarely been so uncertain.

    This is not a columnar conceit. I do not really have a thesis; no point to prove. I can only tentatively explain this atmosphere. But nor am I wrong. This mood is as real as the grief in the church. I am simply reporting what is here.

    Perhaps the magnitude of the moment we face is too great for us collectively to bear. Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority, and in so doing utterly shatter the glass paradigm of cyclical politics which has contained us for the century since 1906.

    This ought to herald another decade of strong, confident, consensual Labour government. Which will finally and irrevocably transform the nature of politics and civic life in Britain.

    That is a frightening responsibility. The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready./i>

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
    Shouldn't Brown have held that election? He might well have won and kept power longer?
    It might have turned his premiership into a rerun of John Major from 1992-1997 and been followed by a landslide win for the Tories.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,772
    rkrkrk said:

    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    Nope, Burnham was in the cabinet when Gordon Brown thought about a snap election, heck he was even mentioned in that seminal article

    We cannot be killed

    'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority'


    Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.

    It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference 2007. Somewhere in the wads of twenty somethings and thirtywouldbes jamming the chintzy Bournemouth bars long after they’re normally silent lurks the jitterbugging desperation of the Twenties before the Crash, Berlin between the wars, London as Imperial Glory died with its queen. The collective psyche of this group of individuals who’ve never had it so good has rarely been so uncertain.

    This is not a columnar conceit. I do not really have a thesis; no point to prove. I can only tentatively explain this atmosphere. But nor am I wrong. This mood is as real as the grief in the church. I am simply reporting what is here.

    Perhaps the magnitude of the moment we face is too great for us collectively to bear. Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority, and in so doing utterly shatter the glass paradigm of cyclical politics which has contained us for the century since 1906.

    This ought to herald another decade of strong, confident, consensual Labour government. Which will finally and irrevocably transform the nature of politics and civic life in Britain.

    That is a frightening responsibility. The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready./i>

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
    Shouldn't Brown have held that election? He might well have won and kept power longer?
    The ICM marginals poll had the Tories winning the most seats.

    I think at best Brown would have governed in coalition with the Lib Dems which would not have survived the Great Financial Crisis, I suspect that coalition would have ended by early 2009 and we'd seen an election in 2009 which would have put the Tories in power.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 60,314
    Andy Burnham says that his campaign is all about changing the Labour party.

    https://x.com/AndyBurnhamGM/status/2059302694506914267
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,772
    AnneJGP said:

    rkrkrk said:

    If Restore is splitting the Reform vote it does slightly increase the chances Burnham might call an early election. Helluva gamble though.

    Nope, Burnham was in the cabinet when Gordon Brown thought about a snap election, heck he was even mentioned in that seminal article

    We cannot be killed

    'Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority'


    Let’s be clear: this is a mad one. You won’t have heard it anywhere else, but you can take it from me. At the age of 38, this is my 17th consecutive Labour Party conference, and I’ve never been to one quite like this.

    It’s in the nature of collective hysteria that no single act can be adduced to prove its existence. But there is a fin de siecle, self-destructive, decadent craziness about Conference 2007. Somewhere in the wads of twenty somethings and thirtywouldbes jamming the chintzy Bournemouth bars long after they’re normally silent lurks the jitterbugging desperation of the Twenties before the Crash, Berlin between the wars, London as Imperial Glory died with its queen. The collective psyche of this group of individuals who’ve never had it so good has rarely been so uncertain.

    This is not a columnar conceit. I do not really have a thesis; no point to prove. I can only tentatively explain this atmosphere. But nor am I wrong. This mood is as real as the grief in the church. I am simply reporting what is here.

    Perhaps the magnitude of the moment we face is too great for us collectively to bear. Shortly there will be an election, in which Labour will increase its majority, and in so doing utterly shatter the glass paradigm of cyclical politics which has contained us for the century since 1906.

    This ought to herald another decade of strong, confident, consensual Labour government. Which will finally and irrevocably transform the nature of politics and civic life in Britain.

    That is a frightening responsibility. The young princes who now stride the parade ground with the confidence born of aristocratic schooling can never be afraid. They never have been. Like latter day Pushkins drilled in the elite academy of Brownian blitzkrieg, they are bursting with their sense of destiny. It’s not the Milibands, the Ballses or the Burnhams who are unconsciously nervous. This is the moment for which they were created. They are ready./i>

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2007/09/labour-majority-increase
    Never fails to make me LOL.
    It's a good reminder to not be hubristic.
  • Brixian59Brixian59 Posts: 2,571

    Barnesian said:

    Andy_JS said:

    FPT:

    I see the May temperature has reached 35 degrees in London. Commisserations to those in the capital.

    There doesn't seem to have been much comment on the previous record - which has now been topped - was 32.8C, which was set in 1922 and 1944. What was the excuse for the bonkers heat in those years if not climate change?

    Who'll be the first candidate in Makerfield to cry "climate hoax!"?

    Do you really think a couple of hot days proves climate change is true? I think it's true, but not because of this.
    It's further evidence, not proof.
    How about 32.8 in 1922 and 1944?
    One off hot or cold means are what they are, outliers

    What we are seeing though without doubt is a sustained average increase over a decade.

    Here in Brixham we have Plymouth University Marine Biology Lab

    They are mapping staggering general increases in sea temperatures onshore and offshore.

    Fish species being caught by the day and medium size trawlers are changing more and more fish usually not seen in our waters
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 23,397

    Andy Burnham says that his campaign is all about changing the Labour party.

    https://x.com/AndyBurnhamGM/status/2059302694506914267

    So his first Prime Ministerial broadcast will feature Stravinsky and a Modern Art backdrop, then.

    (Which is probably for the best. The last couple of years have been about the government taking the only realistic path, with terrible comms.)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,772
    Our next Prime Minister doing his best to stop Andy Burnham winning in Makerfield.

    Great to be out campaigning for Andy Burnham in Makerfield today.

    Totally clear it’s going to be Andy or Reform who wins here.

    Let’s get Andy into Parliament and show Farage that his reheated Thatcherism isn’t the change working people are crying out for.


    https://x.com/RichardBurgon/status/2059319392786120764
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 60,536
    Hmmm... lots of thunder around the southern half of the UK at the mo.

    https://www.lightningmaps.org/#m=oss;t=3;s=0;o=0;b=0.00;ts=0;z=7;y=50.903;x=-1.6058;d=2;dl=2;dc=0;
  • eekeek Posts: 34,568

    Our next Prime Minister doing his best to stop Andy Burnham winning in Makerfield.

    Great to be out campaigning for Andy Burnham in Makerfield today.

    Totally clear it’s going to be Andy or Reform who wins here.

    Let’s get Andy into Parliament and show Farage that his reheated Thatcherism isn’t the change working people are crying out for.


    https://x.com/RichardBurgon/status/2059319392786120764

    Got to say he's a frigging idiot, at all times Labour should be emphasising that Restore are the competition - simply for the LOLs.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 73,288
    eek said:

    Our next Prime Minister doing his best to stop Andy Burnham winning in Makerfield.

    Great to be out campaigning for Andy Burnham in Makerfield today.

    Totally clear it’s going to be Andy or Reform who wins here.

    Let’s get Andy into Parliament and show Farage that his reheated Thatcherism isn’t the change working people are crying out for.


    https://x.com/RichardBurgon/status/2059319392786120764

    Got to say he's a frigging idiot, at all times Labour should be emphasising that Restore are the competition - simply for the LOLs.
    And where does this "reheated Thatcherism" come from?

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,608
    Nigelb said:

    Does that not leave her in something of a strategic bind ?

    It's possibly time for Labour to embrace rejoin (and certainly for the LibDems), and any such thing would leave the Tories trying for an uncomfortable straddle. They can't compete with Farage as leavers (and would only alienate half their remaining support if they tried), but equally, they need to win back votes on the right.

    Yes, it reinforces my pessimistic view of their prospects in the medium term. The centre is not really listening to them, and if they try they lose half their remaining support. But they lose half their support if they go too hard to the right - where they is probably more theoretical votes, but which has the real deal in Reform not some 'sensible' 'leave but not weird about it' pitch.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 73,288

    Hmmm... lots of thunder around the southern half of the UK at the mo.

    https://www.lightningmaps.org/#m=oss;t=3;s=0;o=0;b=0.00;ts=0;z=7;y=50.903;x=-1.6058;d=2;dl=2;dc=0;

    Can confirm - load of thunder and rain in my bit of the Midlands.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 3,604

    kinabalu said:

    REF = Barge atm for Macca. Trading over 4 now. Not sure what's driving it. Can't be that poll showing them 3 pts behind. That was quite good for them imo.

    I did say there were two polls that I was aware for Makerfield, remember not all polls are published.
    Insider betting ... as long as it's not a LibDem "Winning Here" poll.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,608
    edited May 26

    eek said:

    Our next Prime Minister doing his best to stop Andy Burnham winning in Makerfield.

    Great to be out campaigning for Andy Burnham in Makerfield today.

    Totally clear it’s going to be Andy or Reform who wins here.

    Let’s get Andy into Parliament and show Farage that his reheated Thatcherism isn’t the change working people are crying out for.


    https://x.com/RichardBurgon/status/2059319392786120764

    Got to say he's a frigging idiot, at all times Labour should be emphasising that Restore are the competition - simply for the LOLs.
    And where does this "reheated Thatcherism" come from?

    Because a lot of modern politicians formed their political views in the mid to late 90s immediately post Thatcher, or even earlier, and so are obsessed with refighting the battles of the 80s, when probably their parents were particularly interested. It isn't unique to the left in fairness.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 129,772
    Battlebus said:

    kinabalu said:

    REF = Barge atm for Macca. Trading over 4 now. Not sure what's driving it. Can't be that poll showing them 3 pts behind. That was quite good for them imo.

    I did say there were two polls that I was aware for Makerfield, remember not all polls are published.
    Insider betting ... as long as it's not a LibDem "Winning Here" poll.
    I would never bet on an embargoed poll.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 104,608

    Andy Burnham says that his campaign is all about changing the Labour party.

    https://x.com/AndyBurnhamGM/status/2059302694506914267

    Not even pretending to not be about booting out the PM then, which is fair.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 40,953
    "Almost 1,000 migrants cross Channel over bank holiday"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy422k3z83vo
This discussion has been closed.