Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on December 31, 2023, 09:19:36 AM
-
Given the timings, while in theory the election could be delayed to 2025, it won't be. So starting this, and stickying, with the return, if only for a brief appearance one hopes, of Dominic Cummings.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67851985
-
Given the timings, while in theory the election could be delayed to 2025, it won't be. So starting this, and stickying, with the return, if only for a brief appearance one hopes, of Dominic Cummings.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67851985
Can you imagine what it would be like to have an election campaign over Christmas, which is what we'd get if the government left it as late as possible.
My mother thinks May. I think October. I hope she is right.
-
Can you imagine what it would be like to have an election campaign over Christmas, which is what we'd get if the government left it as late as possible.
My mother thinks May. I think October. I hope she is right.
Given that Sunak has so little sense as to get Cummings in and expect him not to blab, I'm not ruling out Christmas Day.
On balance it feels to me that October is what will happen but I wonder whether part of the Tories and Sunak will just want to get it over with.
-
Article on the difficulties and choices Sunak faces:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/31/eve-of-election-year-rishi-sunak-faces-dilemma
-
Article on the difficulties and choices Sunak faces:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/31/eve-of-election-year-rishi-sunak-faces-dilemma
The question that stands out to me is what is Sunak working hard for? When he does call an election, what does even the meagrest vision look like? Stopping the boats is bately a hint of a policy.
ETA - I don't feel much warmer about Starmer but at least he isn't the actual Tories.
-
I suppose a lot might depend on just how the Rwanda thing pans out when the circus resumes: if the infighting is intense it may be that Sunak would be well advised to call an election simply to put an end to the saga.
A chap I know tells me that in the rush to legislate the UK government have neglected to consult with the Scottish Parliament and that there are aspects of the planned legislation that could conflict with Scots Law and raise more issues - I've no idea how accurate this view is, but the Tory government is in such as mess now that nothing would surprise me any more.
-
Apparently Starmer is going to say that everyone should be excited because Labour are really different but not give any policies. And given the continual paring of any policies last year, it seems an odd approach. The trying to avoid upsetting the horses approach is a perfectly valud one but it will not get people excited, and I would think that the conflict between the two messages isn't useful, and may be a problem.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67878342
-
Sunak indicates second half of year
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67883242
-
'Big difference between Labour and Tories, says Sir Keir Starmer'
It would be easier to believe if when
'asked if Labour would overturn any cut to inheritance tax if the party wins power' he had said 'yes' and not "I don't believe in tax breaks for those who are already well-off when there's nothing on offer for working people."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67880324
-
So Reeves is an idiot, and Sunak a liar, or vice versa, or both
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67892958
-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/08/alok-sharma-i-wont-back-uk-government-oil-and-gas-bill (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/08/alok-sharma-i-wont-back-uk-government-oil-and-gas-bill)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/08/centrist-tories-reject-mps-claim-party-must-shift-to-the-right (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/08/centrist-tories-reject-mps-claim-party-must-shift-to-the-right)
The tories need to make their mind up. It's either one argument or another. They can't have both.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/08/alok-sharma-i-wont-back-uk-government-oil-and-gas-bill (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/08/alok-sharma-i-wont-back-uk-government-oil-and-gas-bill)
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/08/centrist-tories-reject-mps-claim-party-must-shift-to-the-right (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/08/centrist-tories-reject-mps-claim-party-must-shift-to-the-right)
The tories need to make their mind up. It's either one argument or another. They can't have both.
The thing is there currently at least 2 Tory parties if not more, so having both is pretty much what they are going to do till the election. I'm not sure Sunak is in either party, or indeed is really political in that sense.
-
Boundary changes effect on swing needed for Labour majority
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67361138
-
While the Tory Party indulge in internecine strife, the Labour Party unleashes its bible on how to tell the country that it's ready to think about telling the country what it's considering, in the fullness of time going to do after all other considerations are looked at.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67993311
-
While the Tory Party indulge in internecine strife, the Labour Party unleashes its bible on how to tell the country that it's ready to think about telling the country what it's considering, in the fullness of time going to do after all other considerations are looked at.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67993311
Cor! Isn't Angela Rayner tall?
-
Cor! Isn't Angela Rayner tall?
As good an election slogan as any of the others so far.
-
As good an election slogan as any of the others so far.
And do you know she crosses her legs.
-
And do you know she crosses her legs.
To be fair, that was one of the few times Johnson dealt with the idiocy sensibly.
-
To be fair, that was one of the few times Johnson dealt with the idiocy sensibly.
I don't recall that. That may be due to an automatic assumption I make that if his mouth is open then he is lying. Always best to err on the side of caution.
Edit: having looked back at this in the press, he did, indeed react sensibly. I can only put it down to the "stopped clock" premise.
-
Actually, she's 5'6", which is only average, and KS is 5'8.5". She probably looks taller than him because she's a few feet in front of him, and the camera angle is low.
-
I can't help feeling that it might all go horribly wrong come the election. In 1997, Labour only had a fairly slim Tory majority to overturn, but this time round, the Tory majority is huge - as has been pointed out by various commentators, but which everyone is ignoring.
-
I can't help feeling that it might all go horribly wrong come the election. In 1997, Labour only had a fairly slim Tory majority to overturn, but this time round, the Tory majority is huge - as has been pointed out by various commentators, but which everyone is ignoring.
I agree and something is going on underneath the radar so to speak.
I was at my usual Monday morning coffee group (gay old codgers against the world) and the discussion veered into politics - it is usually skimmed over, but not this time. I was surprised and dismayed at the reach that GBNews has gained with 3 of the group preferring it to other news outlets. Interestingly the three also said that all parties were the same and they didn't know who to vote for. I'm afraid I launched into a bit of a tirade about them being indoctrinated by false news and billionaires. I didn't win any friends that particular morning. I did say something about "useful idiots" at one point. Still, I did feel better ;D
-
I agree and something is going on underneath the radar so to speak.
I was at my usual Monday morning coffee group (gay old codgers against the world) and the discussion veered into politics - it is usually skimmed over, but not this time. I was surprised and dismayed at the reach that GBNews has gained with 3 of the group preferring it to other news outlets. Interestingly the three also said that all parties were the same and they didn't know who to vote for. I'm afraid I launched into a bit of a tirade about them being indoctrinated by false news and billionaires. I didn't win any friends that particular morning. I did say something about "useful idiots" at one point. Still, I did feel better ;D
The % that both Reform and Greem are polling are unrealistic. Both of which are to an extent protest 'votes'. The question will be whether these go to other parties, and which do they go to. I think there is no doubt that the polls are currently a bit flaky but it's more that it's still a phony war.
Those who say parties are all the same are surely just different takes on pretty much what we all think here. No one's rushing out to vote Labour because of the sunlit uplands, rather that there is a chance they may not be irredeemably shite.
I'll only vote for a candidate who will stand up for women's sex based spaces, and isn't a Tory or worse. It may be that I end up spoiling my ballot paper as I did in the Holyrood electiion. In terms of the seat, it won't make a lot of difference as it's very likely to go Labour from SNP. I'm in a seat that will disappear at the GE just to make me feel even more disasaociated from it.
-
I can't help feeling that it might all go horribly wrong come the election. In 1997, Labour only had a fairly slim Tory majority to overturn, but this time round, the Tory majority is huge - as has been pointed out by various commentators, but which everyone is ignoring.
Depends on where you ask.
On the political blogs I follow the notion that Labour need a huge swing to overturn the Tory majority and win a majority of their own isn't ignored at all. Nope it is completely baked into the conversation.
But this is against a baseline of 2019 and that was a bizarre snap election effectively on a single issue (and a Boris or Corbyn personality battle), neither of which are in play any more. So I think people should be careful in assuming this to be the obvious baseline given that it threw up seats going Tory that had never done before in anyone's lifetime and which had otherwise been solidly Labour - so the Tory support was a mile wide, but in many places an inch thick.
So perhaps a better baseline is actually 2017 (the 2017 to 2019 Boris/Brexit shift had surely unwound prior to the most recent Labour surge and Tory slump). So although Labour do need to flip more seats than in any election in living memory many of those with be 2019 flipped seats without any long-range heritage of being Tory, nor seats where the likes of Sunak will be a positive.
-
Cor! Isn't Angela Rayner tall?
https://youtu.be/MMiKyfd6hA0?si=VVLCg2VI14axVBQT
-
Depends on where you ask.
On the political blogs I follow the notion that Labour need a huge swing to overturn the Tory majority and win a majority of their own isn't ignored at all. Nope it is completely baked into the conversation.
But this is against a baseline of 2019 and that was a bizarre snap election effectively on a single issue (and a Boris or Corbyn personality battle), neither of which are in play any more. So I think people should be careful in assuming this to be the obvious baseline given that it threw up seats going Tory that had never done before in anyone's lifetime and which had otherwise been solidly Labour - so the Tory support was a mile wide, but in many places an inch thick.
So perhaps a better baseline is actually 2017 (the 2017 to 2019 Boris/Brexit shift had surely unwound prior to the most recent Labour surge and Tory slump). So although Labour do need to flip more seats than in any election in living memory many of those with be 2019 flipped seats without any long-range heritage of being Tory, nor seats where the likes of Sunak will be a positive.
This.
People forget that 2019 was something of an anomaly with many traditionally Labour seats going to the Tories thanks to the confluence of several unusual circumstances.
And people say Labour need a record swing. Well, the vote in 2019 was Con 45%, Lab 33%. Based on recent opinion polls, the vote now would be Con 26%, Lab 42%. If that were born out (I'm sure the actual margin will be a bit narrower), it would be a massive swing.
-
This.
People forget that 2019 was something of an anomaly with many traditionally Labour seats going to the Tories thanks to the confluence of several unusual circumstances.
And people say Labour need a record swing. Well, the vote in 2019 was Con 45%, Lab 33%. Based on recent opinion polls, the vote now would be Con 26%, Lab 42%. If that were born out (I'm sure the actual margin will be a bit narrower), it would be a massive swing.
And my point is that as recently as the 2017 general election the result was Con 42% (317 seats), Lab 40% (262 seats) - are we really saying that the 2017 to 2019 shift is 'baked-in' rather than a temporary blip based on anomalous circumstances which no longer exist (Get Brexit done; Boris; Corbyn). Given that mush of the commentary about 2019 surrounded previous non-voters who voted for the first time, surely given how things have gone the obvious expectation for 2024 will be that those people, by and large, will go back to being non-voters.
By the way - the most recent poll from YouGov (from yesterday) has Labour on 47% and the Tories on just 29%.
But I think a key battleground that could determine whether Labour get an overall majority or largest party in a hung parliament will be Scotland. Win 20-30 seats in Scotland which seems completely plausible given the travails of the SNP (from the last election total of just one) and much of the heavy lifting is done.
-
And my point is that as recently as the 2017 general election the result was Con 42% (317 seats), Lab 40% (262 seats) - are we really saying that the 2017 to 2019 shift is 'baked-in' rather than a temporary blip based on anomalous circumstances which no longer exist (Get Brexit done; Boris; Corbyn). Given that mush of the commentary about 2019 surrounded previous non-voters who voted for the first time, surely given how things have gone the obvious expectation for 2024 will be that those people, by and large, will go back to being non-voters.
By the way - the most recent poll from YouGov (from yesterday) has Labour on 47% and the Tories on just 29%.
But I think a key battleground that could determine whether Labour get an overall majority or largest party in a hung parliament will be Scotland. Win 20-30 seats in Scotland which seems completely plausible given the travails of the SNP (from the last election total of just one) and much of the heavy lifting is done.
Electoral Calculus (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html) based on polls from December has Labour on 412 seats and the Conservatives on 152. Their worst case scenario for Labour is 304 and for the Tories the best case is still only 263.
I think they must be used on 95 percentiles.
For interest, here is what they think will happen in Scotland
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/scotland.html
A gain of 20 seats.
-
Risk! For Risk! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jan/18/rishi-sunak-press-conference-rwanda-bill-conservatives-labour-fujitsu-post-office-horizon-uk-politics-latest (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jan/18/rishi-sunak-press-conference-rwanda-bill-conservatives-labour-fujitsu-post-office-horizon-uk-politics-latest)
Rishi Sunak challenges House of Lords to accept ‘the will of the people’
If he had any interest in "the people", call a general election.
-
Risk! For Risk! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jan/18/rishi-sunak-press-conference-rwanda-bill-conservatives-labour-fujitsu-post-office-horizon-uk-politics-latest (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jan/18/rishi-sunak-press-conference-rwanda-bill-conservatives-labour-fujitsu-post-office-horizon-uk-politics-latest)If he had any interest in "the people", call a general election.
Brexit tells us what the "will of the people" is worth.
But anyway, the will of this person is that he should call a general election tomorrow at the latest.
-
Risk! For Risk! https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jan/18/rishi-sunak-press-conference-rwanda-bill-conservatives-labour-fujitsu-post-office-horizon-uk-politics-latest (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jan/18/rishi-sunak-press-conference-rwanda-bill-conservatives-labour-fujitsu-post-office-horizon-uk-politics-latest)If he had any interest in "the people", call a general election.
I can see that if something is within a general election manifesto from a party that wins an election then you could claim it to be the 'will of the people'. However even then it is a pretty lame argument, as individuals vote in general elections on a multitude of issues, rather than a single one that might happen in a referendum.
Problem is that the Rwanda policy wasn't in the Tories 2019 manifesto so even that weak argument goes out of the window.
-
I can see that if something is within a general election manifesto from a party that wins an election then you could claim it to be the 'will of the people'. However even then it is a pretty lame argument, as individuals vote in general elections on a multitude of issues, rather than a single one that might happen in a referendum.
Problem is that the Rwanda policy wasn't in the Tories 2019 manifesto so even that weak argument goes out of the window.
It's a decent Hail Mary to try the evil House of Lords versus the voice of the people, House of Commons, at least from the perspective of a desperate Tory Govt who don't care about the rule of law going into an election they look bpund to lose because of having been a parade of corrupt ineptitude.
-
It's a decent Hail Mary to try the evil House of Lords versus the voice of the people, House of Commons, at least from the perspective of a desperate Tory Govt who don't care about the rule of law going into an election they look bpund to lose because of having been a parade of corrupt ineptitude.
It's just a rehash of the approach around Brexit. But that had some merit as there was a referendum specifically asking 'the people' whether they wanted Brexit, and they said 'yes'.
The argument simply doesn't work where there has been no direct (e.g. a referendum question) or indirect (one of many manifesto pledges in a general election) vote to indicate what the 'will of the people' is on this. So you are left with opinion polling and the most recent suggests that more people want the Rwanda policy scrapped than continued. And even for those who want it continued there is a split between those that want it implemented as currently planned and those that want it amended (which is of course one of the things the Lords can do).
-
It's just a rehash of the approach around Brexit. But that had some merit as there was a referendum specifically asking 'the people' whether they wanted Brexit, and they said 'yes'.
The argument simply doesn't work where there has been no direct (e.g. a referendum question) or indirect (one of many manifesto pledges in a general election) vote to indicate what the 'will of the people' is on this. So you are left with opinion polling and the most recent suggests that more people want the Rwanda policy scrapped than continued. And even for those who want it continued there is a split between those that want it implemented as currently planned and those that want it amended (which is of course one of the things the Lords can do).
I'm not disagreeing about the argument being invalid. It's just they have very little left to try, and no scruples left at all.
As for polling, this is what they will be looking at:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/public-backs-tougher-rwanda-plan-poll-reveals/ar-AA1n0Kh3
And thinking that if the Lords can be portrayed as standing in the way of that, it's enough to win if they got all of them, and even some of them would make losing less of a thrashing.
-
I'm not disagreeing about the argument being invalid. It's just they have very little left to try, and no scruples left at all.
As for polling, this is what they will be looking at:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/public-backs-tougher-rwanda-plan-poll-reveals/ar-AA1n0Kh3
And thinking that if the Lords can be portrayed as standing in the way of that, it's enough to win if they got all of them, and even some of them would make losing less of a thrashing.
Not really sue of the details of that poll, nor when it was conducted.
But this was conducted just a couple of days ago:
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2024/01/17/14134/1
Shows more people (40%) want the Rwanda scheme scrapped than implemented in its current form (20%) or revised (17%) combined.
Also by 53% to 28% people thought the scheme wouldn't be effective. And by 47% to 19% thought it wasn't good value for money.
So the 'will of the people' is that they want the scheme scrapped because it won't work and is too expensive.
-
Not really sue of the details of that poll, nor when it was conducted.
But this was conducted just a couple of days ago:
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2024/01/17/14134/1
Shows more people (40%) want the Rwanda scheme scrapped than implemented in its current form (20%) or revised (17%) combined.
Also by 53% to 28% people thought the scheme wouldn't be effective. And by 47% to 19% thought it wasn't good value for money.
So the 'will of the people' is that they want the scheme scrapped because it won't work and is too expensive.
You seem to be missing the point. It doesn't have to be the will of the people. It just needs to be said as such, and given the 'rebels' were already citing the survey I posted in interviews 2 days ago, they'll use whatever they can to make it look as if it is. When they add that to a run against the 'undemocratic' HoL, they might manage to convince enough people that they are defending democracy. They don't have a lot of other options.
I think that the Jenricks and Bravermans wanted the bill to be so obviously deeply unacceptable to the Lords that their 'intransigence' was guaranteed, and this 'will of the people' would definitely run. Sunak.is aiming for the same but was wanting a unified as possible Tory group of MPs to create the appearance of unity. His pitch on the will of the people now is in the hope that the Lords do knock it back.
-
You seem to be missing the point. It doesn't have to be the will of the people. It just needs to be said as such, and given the 'rebels' were already citing the survey I posted in interviews 2 days ago, they'll use whatever they can to make it look as if it is. When they add that to a run against the 'undemocratic' HoL, they might manage to convince enough people that they are defending democracy. They don't have a lot of other options.
So what you are saying is that people can just make up shit, or cherry pick selected info to suit their own political agenda. Well no shit Sherlock. Doesn't mean that any of this will actually gain any real traction does it.
If anything the recent debacle over the Rwanda scheme is shifting the polls more in favour of Labour than before.
I think that the Jenricks and Bravermans wanted the bill to be so obviously deeply unacceptable to the Lords that their 'intransigence' was guaranteed, and this 'will of the people' would definitely run. Sunak.is aiming for the same but was wanting a unified as possible Tory group of MPs to create the appearance of unity. His pitch on the will of the people now is in the hope that the Lords do knock it back.
But the 'people vs the Lords/Judges' (delete as appropriate) only works where the Lords/Judges are blocking something with credible majority support/mandate. That was the case for Brexit, it isn't the case here. Secondly it only works if it is an issue that is right at the top of the list of issues for most people. Again Brexit was at the time, the small boats isn't, it is way down the list of issues when voters are polled, below the economy, cost of living, NHS etc.
The polling that I've seen recently specifically on the Rwanda scheme (not some rather generic immigration stuff) seems to boil down to public opinion nearest to: 'FFS stop it now, stop wasting time and money on something that won't work and frankly get on with stuff that really matters to us'.
-
So what you are saying is that people can just make up shit, or cherry pick selected info to suit their own political agenda. Well no shit Sherlock. Doesn't mean that any of this will actually gain any real traction does it.
If anything the recent debacle over the Rwanda scheme is shifting the polls more in favour of Labour than before.
But the 'people vs the Lords/Judges' (delete as appropriate) only works where the Lords/Judges are blocking something with credible majority support/mandate. That was the case for Brexit, it isn't the case here. Secondly it only works if it is an issue that is right at the top of the list of issues for most people. Again Brexit was at the time, the small boats isn't, it is way down the list of issues when voters are polled, below the economy, cost of living, NHS etc.
The polling that I've seen recently specifically on the Rwanda scheme (not some rather generic immigration stuff) seems to boil down to public opinion nearest to: 'FFS stop it now, stop waiting time and money on something that won't work and frankly get on with stuff that really matters to us'.
You seem to mistake me saying what people will do as giving it any sort of approval. They have very little choice. They won't turn around the economy, or sort out the NHS. They look at the polls and see the percentages for Reform and think their one chance is getting those.
-
You seem to mistake me saying what people will do as giving it any sort of approval. They have very little choice. They won't turn around the economy, or sort out the NHS. They look at the polls and see the percentages for Reform and think their one chance is getting those.
But they won't fix immigration either. Realistically I think they have a better chance of developing a good news story on the economy/cost of living in the next few months until a likely Autumn election, than making any meaningful inroads into the immigration issues.
-
But they won't fix immigration either. Realistically I think they have a better chance of developing a good news story on the economy/cost of living in the next few months until a likely Autumn election, than making any meaningful inroads into the immigration issues.
No, of course, they won't 'fix' immigration either but they might just be able to persuade enough people that the 'evil establishment' has stymied their gallant attempts at this.
-
Polly Toynbee on why Sunak wants the Lords to block the bill
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/18/rishi-sunak-lords-block-rwanda-bill-blame-left-asylum-seekers
-
No, of course, they won't 'fix' immigration either but they might just be able to persuade enough people that the 'evil establishment' has stymied their gallant attempts at this.
But that requires voters to put greater trust in the government than in those 'blocking' it - whether the Lords or the courts. Again, for Brexit that was the case, but for the Rwanda scheme!?! Your Toynbee article shows that overwhelmingly the public think the government have handled the issue badly and that they trust Labour more on the issue. This is hardly fertile territory for a 'who do you trust more' argument with the courts of the Lords really, is it.
I think what might terrify Sunak most would be if the policy went live and perhaps half a dozen people were deported before the election creating the gaping goal for the opposition where they can give an exact cost to the tax payer for each one of those deportations, which would be close to £100million. You can see the lists now - you could have funded x numbers of nurses, y numbers of addition police officers etc.
-
But that requires voters to put greater trust in the government than in those 'blocking' it - whether the Lords or the courts. Again, for Brexit that was the case, but for the Rwanda scheme!?! Your Toynbee article shows that overwhelmingly the public think the government have handled the issue badly and that they trust Labour more on the issue. This is hardly fertile territory for a 'who do you trust more' argument with the courts of the Lords really, is it.
I think what might terrify Sunak most would be if the policy went live and perhaps half a dozen people were deported before the election creating the gaping goal for the opposition where they can give an exact cost to the tax payer for each one of those deportations, which would be close to £100million. You can see the lists now - you could have funded x numbers of nurses, y numbers of addition police officers etc.
Again, it's all they have, and as you, me, and Toynbee agree they don't want anyone being sent to Rwanda.
-
But that requires voters to put greater trust in the government than in those 'blocking' it - whether the Lords or the courts. Again, for Brexit that was the case, but for the Rwanda scheme!?! Your Toynbee article shows that overwhelmingly the public think the government have handled the issue badly and that they trust Labour more on the issue. This is hardly fertile territory for a 'who do you trust more' argument with the courts of the Lords really, is it.
I think what might terrify Sunak most would be if the policy went live and perhaps half a dozen people were deported before the election creating the gaping goal for the opposition where they can give an exact cost to the tax payer for each one of those deportations, which would be close to £100million. You can see the lists now - you could have funded x numbers of nurses, y numbers of addition police officers etc.
I think your mistake is in assuming that Sunk and the government know what they are doing. At this point they are just scrabbling around for any life line and they think kick starting some sort of populist movement is their best chance. I don't think it will work. You don't think it will work. Deep down they probably know it won't work, but there's nothing else.
-
'A senior Tory MP has called for his party to replace Rishi Sunak as prime minister or be "massacred" in the general election.
Writing in the Telegraph, former cabinet minister Sir Simon Clarke said the Conservatives had lost "key voters" by failing to be bold on immigration.'
Who?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68077142
-
More Tory in fighting
https://archive.vn/0Vypw
-
I suspect that if the Reform Party could convince Nigel Farage as leader, and Martin Lewis as prospective chancellor, they could win the election.
(Obviously, not going to happen)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-68121804
-
The Politics Show was 'fun' this morning. Vicious stuff between Kemi Badenoch and Nadine Dorries exactly showing why voters are pissed off. Fascinating interview with Carlos Del Toro.
The likelihood that we'll have an election just as the US presidential one is really heating up will be interesting to see what crossover we get.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001vw5v/sunday-with-laura-kuenssberg-have-the-public-lost-faith-in-politicians
-
The Politics Show was 'fun' this morning. Vicious stuff between Kemi Badenoch and Nadine Dorries exactly showing why voters are pissed off. Fascinating interview with Carlos Del Toro.
The likelihood that we'll have an election just as the US presidential one is really heating up will be interesting to see what crossover we get.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001vw5v/sunday-with-laura-kuenssberg-have-the-public-lost-faith-in-politicians
Losing faith in politicians equals Tory governments in perpuity IMHO.
-
Losing faith in politicians equals Tory governments in perpuity IMHO.
Does that mean that if Labour win the election you would be proved wrong, or is Starmer a Tory in your opinion?
-
Losing faith in politicians equals Tory governments in perpuity IMHO.
Online acronyms are bloody annoying, IMHOTEP. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imhotep)
-
Poll tracking
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68079726
-
'The Tory cigarette rebellion will likely go up in smoke'. I think will certainly fail but the 'change' and legacy of Sunak are shockingly meagre.
https://archive.vn/ZDR5s
-
Risk! back and Risky.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68209330 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68209330)
Opposition parties attack Rishi Sunak over £1,000 Rwanda bet
https://www.begambleaware.org/signs-of-gambling-harms
The most common signs are feelings of guilt, trying to win back losses and hiding gambling.
-
Risk! back and Risky.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68209330 (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68209330)
What a prick!
-
Obviously when wondering who to vote for, one uses the best information about what they do when they have power. This does not encourage me to vote Labour.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-68211110
-
Extrapolating from an individual case inevitably misses the wider picture no matter how harrowing that case is.
Wales has long-standing issues that are not addressed by the current funding formula:
https://www.nhsconfed.org/articles/can-we-make-direct-comparisons-between-nhs-england-and-wales
I would draw people's attention to this particular section:
It is true that some metrics suggest the NHS in Wales is struggling compared to England – both overall pathways on the waiting list as a proportion of the population and the number of patients in long-wait cohorts, such as 78 and 104-week waiters, are higher in Wales.
However, the disproportionate effect of the older, less healthy, more deprived population in Wales cannot be underestimated in terms of the impact on the demand on health and care services.
Furthermore, direct comparisons of performance data does not take into account policy priorities (for example, focusing efforts on the longest waiters versus those with greatest clinical need).
Ultimately, data is collected, counted, coded and reported differently between the two nations. Performance measures in each country were also brought in at different times with services likely to be at different stages of rollout. This means performance is not directly comparable and to give as accurate a picture as possible, every effort should be made to examine the context when making comparisons.
-
Obviously when wondering who to vote for, one uses the best information about what they do when they have power. This does not encourage me to vote Labour.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-68211110
Health is a devolved matter, so in Scotland controlled by the Scottish Government not the UK Government - so why should the state of healthcare provision in Wales (even ignoring the obvious that one case isn't necessarily instructive) be relevant unless Labour are planning to change that devolved status, which I don't believe they are.
But then you seem to continually find reasons not to vote Labour NS, so this current strawman argument is hardly surprising.
-
Health is a devolved matter, so in Scotland controlled by the Scottish Government not the UK Government - so why should the state of healthcare provision in Wales (even ignoring the obvious that one case isn't necessarily instructive) be relevant unless Labour are planning to change that devolved status, which I don't believe they are.
But then you seem to continually find reasons not to vote Labour NS, so this current strawman argument is hardly surprising.
Prof D,
I don't quite understand your argument. NS is arguing that as health is devolved and if you look at the record in Wales then Labour aren't doing very well. I've posted as to why I think this is mistaken but I can't see your point I'm afraid.
-
Prof D,
I don't quite understand your argument. NS is arguing that as health is devolved and if you look at the record in Wales then Labour aren't doing very well. I've posted as to why I think this is mistaken but I can't see your point I'm afraid.
But this thread is about the UK election - sure this point would be valid if the thread were about elections to the devolved assemblies, but it isn't. Labour will not be in charge of health in Scotland unless they win a Holyrood election, regardless of whether they win a UK general election.
-
Health is a devolved matter, so in Scotland controlled by the Scottish Government not the UK Government - so why should the state of healthcare provision in Wales (even ignoring the obvious that one case isn't necessarily instructive) be relevant unless Labour are planning to change that devolved status, which I don't believe they are.
But then you seem to continually find reasons not to vote Labour NS, so this current strawman argument is hardly surprising.
Aruntraveller got the point so I'll refer you to his explanation. Your mind reading skills seem on a par with your actual rwading skills. I'd love to vote Labour with a happy heart. They just aren't making it easy.
-
But this thread is about the UK election - sure this point would be valid if the thread were about elections to the devolved assemblies, but it isn't. Labour will not be in charge of health in Scotland unless they win a Holyrood election, regardless of whether they win a UK general election.
And yet my vote in the UK election may affect the running of the health service in England, and I'd like to be able to vote with a clean conscience.
-
Extrapolating from an individual case inevitably misses the wider picture no matter how harrowing that case is.
Wales has long-standing issues that are not addressed by the current funding formula:
https://www.nhsconfed.org/articles/can-we-make-direct-comparisons-between-nhs-england-and-wales
I would draw people's attention to this particular section:
I'm not arguing that the anyone else is likely to do any better. The health services in the UK are a mess, and I don't see any evidence that Labour will make it better. For a long time I got annoyed that political parties had become too managerial, now ir's more that they are awful managerially.
-
I'm not arguing that the anyone else is likely to do any better. The health services in the UK are a mess, and I don't see any evidence that Labour will make it better. For a long time I got annoyed that political parties had become too managerial, now ir's more that they are awful managerially.
Possibly. But you have 14 years of solid evidence of what the Tories will do. You have previous experience of what Labour would do (up to 2010) and even though that was not perfect I know which I would prefer. Whether Labour would have the money, imagination and expertise to turn the NHS around is up for debate but I'm willing to take a punt that it really could not get any worse and will in all probability get somewhat better.
PS voting with a clean conscience is, and always has been, a lost cause. Go for the least-worst option.
-
Possibly. But you have 14 years of solid evidence of what the Tories will do. You have previous experience of what Labour would do (up to 2010) and even though that was not perfect I know which I would prefer. Whether Labour would have the money, imagination and expertise to turn the NHS around is up for debate but I'm willing to take a punt that it really could not get any worse and will in all probability get somewhat better.
PS voting with a clean conscience is, and always has been, a lost cause. Go for the least-worst option.
If the individual candidate does not believe in women's sex based rights, and is not willing to state that openly and clearly then I won't vote for them.
-
What a prick!
Don't worry Prick! Sunak is trying to row back on his bet now.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/06/rishi-sunak-rows-back-rwanda-bet-piers-morgan (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/06/rishi-sunak-rows-back-rwanda-bet-piers-morgan)
-
Don't worry Prick! Sunak is is trying to row back on his bet now.https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/feb/06/rishi-sunak-rows-back-rwanda-bet-piers-morgan
Outfoxed by Piers Morgan, obvious credentials for PM
-
Kwasi Kwarteng to stand down at election. My heart is broken.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-68214536
-
Obviously when wondering who to vote for, one uses the best information about what they do when they have power. This does not encourage me to vote Labour.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-68211110
And you think the Tories will take better care of the NHS in England* based on an incident that happened in Wales under a different Labour administration to the one that would take control in Westminster?
*Scotland's NHS being run by the SNP government at the moment.
-
And you think the Tories will take better care of the NHS in England* based on an incident that happened in Wales under a different Labour administration to the one that would take control in Westminster?
*Scotland's NHS being run by the SNP government at the moment.
No, didn't say that..
-
No, didn't say that..
I'm not quite sure what your point is then.
Administrations can be competent or incompetent but I'm not aware that competence and political ideology are necessarily related.
An incompetent Labour administration may damage the NHS in England, but I fear that a competent Tory administration would deliberately destroy it.
Anyway, you must vote with your conscience. If you have red lines and some Labour policies are on the wrong side of those red lines, then don't vote for them. However, I suggest "the Welsh Labour Party can't run a health service" should not be one of your red lines in a UK election.
-
I'm not quite sure what your point is then.
Administrations can be competent or incompetent but I'm not aware that competence and political ideology are necessarily related.
An incompetent Labour administration may damage the NHS in England, but I fear that a competent Tory administration would deliberately destroy it.
Anyway, you must vote with your conscience. If you have red lines and some Labour policies are on the wrong side of those red lines, then don't vote for them. However, I suggest "the Welsh Labour Party can't run a health service" should not be one of your red lines in a UK election.
And since I didn't say it was a red line...And was explicit about a different red line
But voting for a party that means well but can't deliver is hardly a joy.
-
I'm not quite sure what your point is then.
Administrations can be competent or incompetent but I'm not aware that competence and political ideology are necessarily related.
An incompetent Labour administration may damage the NHS in England, but I fear that a competent Tory administration would deliberately destroy it.
Anyway, you must vote with your conscience. If you have red lines and some Labour policies are on the wrong side of those red lines, then don't vote for them. However, I suggest "the Welsh Labour Party can't run a health service" should not be one of your red lines in a UK election.
I'd agree with that - and of course a UK Labour administration, should one be formed after the general election, won't be the same as the Labour administration in Wales. Accordingly you cannot simply map one to the other on the basis of if the Welsh Labour administration is incompetent, then so must a future Labour UK administration.
I wonder whether NS is consistent - for example in suggesting that just because a local council run by the SNP might be useless then so must an SNP administration in Holyrood.
-
I'd agree with that - and of course a UK Labour administration, should one be formed after the general election, won't be the same as the Labour administration in Wales. Accordingly you cannot simply map one to the other on the basis of if the Welsh Labour administration is incompetent, then so must a future Labour UK administration.
I wonder whether NS is consistent - for example in suggesting that just because a local council run by the SNP might be useless then so must an SNP administration in Holyrood.
I'm not saying it's definitive proof but it's better evidence than party promises. As to the SNP, odd question given I have the evidence of the incompetent administration at Holyrood but yes, I would regard the incompetent admin in Glasgow as evidence against them being likely to be competent in Holyrood.
-
If it were done when tis done then twere well it werev done in a bit of a guddle over a number of weeks
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68232133
-
Good coverage of the election in Scotland from FT
https://archive.vn/QDpph
-
So this is now being floated as a possibility:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13177923/MPs-want-Boris-European-referendum-General-Election-quit-ECHR.html
I know they are desperate but c'mon chaps.....
I wouldn't have thought the necessary legislation would get passed to make the referendum happen in time.
-
So this is now being floated as a possibility:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13177923/MPs-want-Boris-European-referendum-General-Election-quit-ECHR.html
I know they are desperate but c'mon chaps.....
I wouldn't have thought the necessary legislation would get passed to make the referendum happen in time.
Spafftastic
Mail reports conversation of some drugged up Tory wankers (as usual)
-
So this is now being floated as a possibility:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13177923/MPs-want-Boris-European-referendum-General-Election-quit-ECHR.html
I know they are desperate but c'mon chaps.....
I wouldn't have thought the necessary legislation would get passed to make the referendum happen in time.
I'd've thought they'd be avoiding any controversial legislation between now and the GE.
-
I'd've thought they'd be avoiding any controversial legislation between now and the GE.
Electoral Calculus (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html) are currently predicting that the Tories will get 113 seats at the next general election with a maximum of 249. The Tories divide into two camps, in my opinion: those who are absolutely desperate and will try anything and those who know they are going to lose and are just trying to wreck everything for Labour. Either way, this doesn't surprise me.
-
Anderson defects to Reform - no big surprise there then:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/11/lee-anderson-joins-reform-uk-after-losing-tory-whip-over-khan-comments
-
A note of side interest is that in 2020 Lee Anderson voted for the Recall of MPs (Change of Party Affiliation) Bill - which requires an MP to call a by-election if they defect.
-
A note of side interest is that in 2020 Lee Anderson voted for the Recall of MPs (Change of Party Affiliation) Bill - which requires an MP to call a by-election if they defect.
He could, I suppose, argue that it's not worth it this close to a GE.
-
He could, I suppose, argue that it's not worth it this close to a GE.
That is the very argument he and Tice made subsequently.
-
'Election is a straight fight between SNP and Tories - Yousaf'
Doesn't seem a completely accurate summation but even with the more detailed version it's bollocks.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68580909
-
According to a report in the Daily Andrex (aka Daily Mail) there are rumblings of a plot to replace Sunak with Mordaunt before the next GE. Should such a thing seem likely I wonder if Sunak, if he thought he would lose a vote of confidence, would immediately call a GE rather than be ousted - we can always hope.
-
According to a report in the Daily Andrex (aka Daily Mail) there are rumblings of a plot to replace Sunak with Mordaunt before the next GE. Should such a thing seem likely I wonder if Sunak, if he thought he would lose a vote of confidence, would immediately call a GE rather than be ousted - we can always hope.
I almost want them to do it for the melodrama but ffs!
-
Good article on the Tories' problems. They are going to struggle to have a clear message in the GE because they don't have one, and they are not going to agree on one.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/17/our-chances-zero-and-getting-worse-inside-a-tory-edeath-spiral
-
Good article on the Tories' problems. They are going to struggle to have a clear message in the GE because they don't have one, and they are not going to agree on one.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/17/our-chances-zero-and-getting-worse-inside-a-tory-edeath-spiral
I don't think it's that good an article. Look at this mess, for example:
... the chancellor had thrown another 2p cut in national insurance at working people, in the desperate hope of improving the national mood and the Tories’ electoral prospects.
But the post-budget polls quickly showed most people had clocked that the overall effect of Hunt’s measures – one of which was to freeze income-tax thresholds again – would actually be to put taxes up, and that the spending cuts necessary to fund them would hit public services.
So the Guardian seems to think you need spending cuts to fund tax rises. What?
Actually, in a sense, it does exemplify the Tories problems. People both believe the Tories are cutting services to the bone and are putting taxes up, but it's still a shit piece of writing.
This is also interesting (not for bad writing):
[Another ex-cabinet minister – also from the right of the party said] There were two possibilities for the Tories to drag themselves back from the brink... One was for Rishi Sunak to be bolder and abandon more green policies while also abolishing inheritance tax. “But he won’t do that,” he added. “He is just too cautious.”
I think this shows a profound misunderstanding of the electorate. I think the majority of people, if they don't like the personal inconveniences green policies bring, are for them in principle. And I suspect that almost everybody thinks that inheritance tax cuts would be designed to benefit only the rich i.e. Tory members and their supporters. The message given out by such a measure would be bad for the Tories.
-
Did a YouGov survey this morning, at the 3nd or it were a couple of quick questions where they give you the results so far on the info they've gathered. One of the questions was How united or divided was the Tory Party. Apparently 2% think it is very united.
-
Did a YouGov survey this morning, at the 3nd or it were a couple of quick questions where they give you the results so far on the info they've gathered. One of the questions was How united or divided was the Tory Party. Apparently 2% think it is very united.
Those were the people that misread "united" as "untied".
Anyway, got my polling card for the May elections for Bristol City Council and the Avon and Somerset Police and Crime Commissioner.
On the whole I'd rather we didn't have somebody whose job is to commission crime.
-
Interesting Sunday Politics show this morning. I do prefer Kuenssberg version to the Marr programme. Good performance generally from Jeremy Hunt though the £100k not being a great salary soundbite won't go away, and I suspect he went a bit Malcolm Tucker when he heard Andrea Leadsom say the cost of living crisis was over. Annaliese Dodds's equivocation on the Waspi women compensation, where she appeared to blame the electorate for not voting Labour, wasn't great. The contrast between the two on the triode lock on pensions, while effectively a planned ambush by Hunt, didn't look good.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001xpll/sunday-with-laura-kuenssberg-24032024
-
The triple lock has really got to go. All it does is ratchet up state pensions relative to everything else, no matter what.
-
The triple lock has really got to go. All it does is ratchet up state pensions relative to everything else, no matter what.
I'd be interested in seeing some modelling of the costs against what it would have been if you removed different elements of the lock - which happened anyway with wage inflation during Covid, so it's not a complete lock.
Linking it to inflation seems the most sensible.
-
I agree the Triple lock has got to go, but on a rare note of agreement with Hunt he did point out that it had helped raise pensioners out of poverty. Although it is difficult to do exact comparisons with other pensions across Europe we do tend towards the lower end of provision.
I'm not sure what can be done short term to solve that issue as the money is lacking for increases that would bring us in line with even the middle of the table.
This article illustrates the difficulties of making direct comparisons:
https://www.pensiontimes.co.uk/pensions-retirement/state-pension/uk-state-pension-compare-countries
-
To the barricades of levelling up, citizens.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68683454
-
Just went along to Electoral Calculus (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html).
They currently predict 90 Conservative seats (min 23, max 214) based on polling up to March 28th.
The current issues seem to be mostly because Reform UK is eating into their vote, unfortunately.
-
Just went along to Electoral Calculus (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html).
They currently predict 90 Conservative seats (min 23, max 214) based on polling up to March 28th.
The current issues seem to be mostly because Reform UK is eating into their vote, unfortunately.
I take it that the 2nd Green seat it predicts is the one in Bristol you are in?
-
I take it that the 2nd Green seat it predicts is the one in Bristol you are in?
Yes it is. I live in Bristol Central.
-
Yes it is. I live in Bristol Central.
Part of the problem is that Bristol City Council, which is majority Labour, has a very poor reputation.
-
"Labour vows to fund NHS pledges by tackling tax dodgers".
Given even the figures used by Labour have a recovery rate that starts lower than the amount they commit to spend, presumably this means the NHS pledges will be slowed?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68762802
-
Labour moves into poll lead in Scotland
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/labour-lead-snp-in-scotland-for-first-time-since-indyref-poll-shows/ar-BB1lnTPo
-
Labour wants to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP, strangely the same as the Tories want to, when economic conditions allow. Given that the aim is about an apportionment of govt spending, it would be useful to know what needs to change to allow the increase to happen. Is it reduction in debt repayments? What?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68790435
-
Labour wants to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP, strangely the same as the Tories want to, when economic conditions allow. Given that the aim is about an apportionment of govt spending, it would be useful to know what needs to change to allow the increase to happen. Is it reduction in debt repayments? What?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68790435
Yet another bit of news that disenthuses me from Labour. I think I'll vote Green, if they stand.
-
Yet another bit of news that disenthuses me from Labour. I think I'll vote Green, if they stand.
Steve - I think you are Hemel Hempstead? If so, yes there will be a Green candidate (Sherief Hassan).
It is also a seat that on current predicted swings could go Labour - the Tories won't be helped by having to have a new candidate - Mike Penning is not standing again. But it will probably be pretty tight.
So I guess the question is one of pragmatism vs ideology. Sure you can vote Green (they got 3% in the 2019 election), but this seat will either be retained by the Tories or won by Labour. No other result is plausible. Any vote for Green rather than Labour will make the former outcome more likely. Sadly, that's what happens in FPTP - so I guess your choice is whether your top priority is ensure you don't end up with another Tory MP or to vote closest to your ideology.
-
Beat me to it Prof D.
I was going to say much the same. Unless the Greens stand a reasonable chance it is a wasted vote and more than that may let the Conservatives squeak through.
-
Steve - I think you are Hemel Hempstead? If so, yes there will be a Green candidate (Sherief Hassan).
It is also a seat that on current predicted swings could go Labour - the Tories won't be helped by having to have a new candidate - Mike Penning is not standing again. But it will probably be pretty tight.
So I guess the question is one of pragmatism vs ideology. Sure you can vote Green (they got 3% in the 2019 election), but this seat will either be retained by the Tories or won by Labour. No other result is plausible. Any vote for Green rather than Labour will make the former outcome more likely. Sadly, that's what happens in FPTP - so I guess your choice is whether your top priority is ensure you don't end up with another Tory MP or to vote closest to your ideology.
Yes, I'm Hemel.
The above is why I will probably, grudgingly and unenthusiastically, vote Labour again after all.
-
Yes, I'm Hemel.
The above is why I will probably, grudgingly and unenthusiastically, vote Labour again after all.
Until there is a change in the electoral system this is what millions of people end up doing - and it isn't just Labour - there are plenty of examples where people feel they have to vote Tory, LidDem, SNP etc when they'd actually prefer to vote for another party.
FPTP make people vote to get rid of their least preferred option, rather than to vote for their most preferred option.
-
Yes, I'm Hemel.
The above is why I will probably, grudgingly and unenthusiastically, vote Labour again after all.
And one of the things that obviously then increases your grudges is the Labour Party's position on PR.
-
And one of the things that obviously then increases your grudges is the Labour Party's position on PR.
But we come back to pragmatism. Which is more likely to achieve PR - voting for a party with a chance of holding the levers of power that may be somewhat lukewarm to PR or voting for a party that is massively in favour but has absolutely no chance of holding the levers of power and therefore implementing that change.
Now I know Labour aren't wholeheartedly in favour of PR for general elections (although conference did vote in favour of this), but actually they have a pretty good track record of implementing non-FPTP systems when they have held the levers of power - examples being Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, various Mayors including in London, EU elections etc. By contrast have the Tories ever legislated to bring in a non-FPTP system for elections - in London they've just reversed the Labour non-FPTP system to introduce FPTP.
Now seeing as under the current arrangements there are only 2 choices to lead a Westminster government - Tory or Labour - which is more likely to move towards non-FPTP for general elections?
-
But we come back to pragmatism. Which is more likely to achieve PR - voting for a party with a chance of holding the levers of power that may be somewhat lukewarm to PR or voting for a party that is massively in favour but has absolutely no chance of holding the levers of power and therefore implementing that change.
Now I know Labour aren't wholeheartedly in favour of PR for general elections (although conference did vote in favour of this), but actually they have a pretty good track record of implementing non-FPTP systems when they have held the levers of power - examples being Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly, various Mayors including in London, EU elections etc. By contrast have the Tories ever legislated to bring in a non-FPTP system for elections - in London they've just reversed the Labour non-FPTP system to introduce FPTP.
Now seeing as under the current arrangements there are only 2 choices to lead a Westminster government - Tory or Labour - which is more likely to move towards non-FPTP for general elections?
Agree.
-
Agree.
I think the fundamental problem here is that a party that wins under FPTP will be unlikely to propose something that may rock the boat that allowed them to win. And while in opposition they cannot implement anything regardless of their desire to.
Crystal ball gazing - one of the key things you need to do when in power is to change and set the agenda. Every government has done this over my lifetime, but often as an opposition coming into an election they are 'timid' as they are playing to the agenda set by the incumbent government.
So I wouldn't be surprised if, when Labour assuringly comes to power, there is a big shift in agenda on constitution/electoral reform. They won't have much money to play with, but these kind of changes cost next to nothing. And therefore it seems completely plausible that a Labour government would use the first term on more minor stuff (Lords reform, bringing back non-FPTP where it has been removed etc) but goes into a 2028/29 election with a manifesto promise on reform of the electoral system for general elections.
-
I think the fundamental problem here is that a party that wins under FPTP will be unlikely to propose something that may rock the boat that allowed them to win. And while in opposition they cannot implement anything regardless of their desire to.
Crystal ball gazing - one of the key things you need to do when in power is to change and set the agenda. Every government has done this over my lifetime, but often as an opposition coming into an election they are 'timid' as they are playing to the agenda set by the incumbent government.
So I wouldn't be surprised if, when Labour assuringly comes to power, there is a big shift in agenda on constitution/electoral reform. They won't have much money to play with, but these kind of changes cost next to nothing. And therefore it seems completely plausible that a Labour government would use the first term on more minor stuff (Lords reform, bringing back non-FPTP where it has been removed etc) but goes into a 2028/29 election with a manifesto promise on reform of the electoral system for general elections.
Can't really be assured of govts implementing the manifestos they are elected on so voting on unwritten future election manifestos would seem a fool's game
-
Can't really be assured of govts implementing the manifestos they are elected on so voting on unwritten future election manifestos would seem a fool's game
At least there is a possibility of a manifesto getting implemented if that party wins power.
If the implementation of a manifesto is your goal then you will always be disappointed if you vote for a party that has no chance of winning power and therefore having the opportunity of implementing their manifesto.
The art of the possible.
-
Can't really be assured of govts implementing the manifestos they are elected on so voting on unwritten future election manifestos would seem a fool's game
By the way I'm not saying you should vote Labour on the basis of my speculation about where their position may be on electoral reform by the 2028/29 election. I'm merely speculating and given that there will be precious little cash to splash about an incoming Labour government may look at ways in which they can change things and set a new agenda without having to spend billions.
-
At least there is a possibility of a manifesto getting implemented if that party wins power.
If the implementation of a manifesto is your goal then you will always be disappointed if you vote for a party that has no chance of winning power and therefore having the opportunity of implementing their manifesto.
The art of the possible.
And yet if a party that doesn't have a chance of winning directly gets a substantial vote it may move other parties to pick up elements of its manifesto.
-
And yet if a party that doesn't have a chance of winning directly gets a substantial vote it may move other parties to pick up elements of its manifesto.
But those votes for a minor party would only affect the next election manifesto and I thought you considered voting on unwritten future election manifestos to be a fool's game.
-
But those votes for a minor party would only affect the next election manifesto and I thought you considered voting on unwritten future election manifestos to be a fool's game.
It may also change govt policy after the election. But l, yes, I'm not consistent there. I was just working off the idea of the art of the possible.
-
Former MPs on the comeback trail.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68721389
-
Viewers of GB News are more likely to vote Labour than Conservative
https://archive.fo/qpWmz
-
Monty Panesar to stand for George Galloway's I Love George Galloway Party, obviously
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/england-cricket-star-monty-panesar-32701158
-
Muslim Vote group issues 18 demands to Starmer.
Just the 18 then!
https://archive.fo/heHXi
-
Monty Panesar to stand for George Galloway's I Love George Galloway Party, obviously
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/england-cricket-star-monty-panesar-32701158
And now not, and pulled out of the party
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68976806
-
Labour 30% ahead of Tories who are on 18%
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/labour-holds-30-point-poll-lead-over-conservatives/ar-BB1m6dut
-
Electoral Calculus currently predicts less than 100 seats for the Tories
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html
-
The longer Risky leaves calling the election, the less popular he'll be, and the worse the Tories will do as a result.
-
Not sure this sort of violent agreement between the two main parties is going to shift a lot of votes in the election except away from them.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgy9qpdr8go
-
Apparently things are going to change more in the next 5 years than the previous 30, and Mystic Rishi knows what to do despite all the solutions he's suggesting being about dealing with things that already happened and hasn't dealt with.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69000303
-
The longer Risky leaves calling the election, the less popular he'll be, and the worse the Tories will do as a result.
He's just hoping that Starmer will slip up in some way. That's his only chance of getting back in.
-
Farage for Home Secretary, Johnson for Foreign Secretary touts Rees-Mogg
https://www.msn.com/en-sg/news/other/tories-should-make-nigel-farage-home-secretary-to-reunite-the-right/ar-BB1mq3NJ
-
Build your own Jacob Rees-Mogg.
-
Getting serious now - 6 pledges from Starmer, no news if they are going to carved in stone.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69016719
-
FTA
The Conservatives said the Labour leader was on his "16th relaunch" and had "no coherent plan".
That is a deliciously ambiguous sentence. Who is it that has "no coherent plan" - the Labour leader or the Conservatives?
I'm a bit disappointed that Labour has added a sixth pledge because, otherwise, they could say they've got a pledge for every Tory prime minister since 2015.
-
Getting serious now - 6 pledges from Starmer, no news if they are going to carved in stone.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69016719
They are unlikely to make that mistake again.
-
They are unlikely to make that mistake again.
That's a shame, it's one of my all time favourite bad ideas in politics.
-
Fun and games in Islington North
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/paul-mason-applies-to-contest-corbyns-seat-for-labour-as-nominations-open-374840/
-
Whose black hole is the biggest?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy9x4n9gjz4o
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3g51qlxezro
-
Wes Streeting's fluff on Sunday Morning with Kuennsberg will undoubtedly mean lots of homework and tests for Labour PPCs. I also think that it underlines 5 is a better number to have than 6.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-69034413
-
Poll tracking latest
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68079726
-
Reports on the Guardian Live Blog that Sunak might call an election on 4th July - time will tell I suppose.
-
Reports on the Guardian Live Blog that Sunak might call an election on 4th July - time will tell I suppose.
A resonant date
-
Reports on the Guardian Live Blog that Sunak might call an election on 4th July - time will tell I suppose.
Chris Mason on the possibility
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69048696
-
Reports on the Guardian Live Blog that Sunak might call an election on 4th July - time will tell I suppose.
Independence day - almost as unintentionally significant a date as 1st May, the date of the 1997 election, which has long been recognised as Labour day, and is also Mayday, which means "Help!".
-
Tune into Rishiwatch
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-69042935
-
Letters of no confidence in Sunak being submitted?
-
According to "sources", Risky is about to announce a 4th July election.
-
According to "sources", Risky is about to announce a 4th July election.
Between the round of 16 and quarter finals at Euro 2024.
-
Between the round of 16 and quarter finals at Euro 2024.
And 1st Thursday of Wimbledon 2024
-
As commentator on BBC has just noted the date is before the English school holidays but after the start of the Scottish school holidays.
PM statement at 17.00
-
Announcement due at 1700.
-
Security, Security, Security.
-
Too wet for 17.00 announcement?
-
Lectern appeared
-
It's Rishi!
-
Presumably he thinks that now is better than later - which doesn't bode well for later.
-
And D:Ream
-
It's the 4th!
-
'Environmental dogma'
-
Not bad speech. Not surprising but clear on the strategy.
SECURITY
-
And he's fucked off back into No. 10.
-
Now Keir!
-
He shouldn't be speaking around the room but directly into the camera.
-
'I had a real job'
-
Again no surprises, it's the economy, stupid!
-
Paula Vennells will be relieved she's not the main news.
-
Radio Scotland was a hoot at just after 5.30, as I was deriving. The odious and sleekit chairman of the Scottish Conservatives, Craig Hoy, was asked if the Scottish Conservatives were briefed in advance or did they find out with the rest of us - Craig had clearly lost the ability to understand English and just evaded - and very obviously evaded.
I suspect they weren't briefed since if they had been the would have told Sunak et al that Scottish schools stop for the summer holidays on 27th June and many of us will be away on 4th July (we will): this won't go unnoticed since many will need to organise a postal vote, which suggests that the Tories don't really care about Scotland. Hell would freeze over before I would ever vote for them.
-
.
-
Just a reminder that photo ID will be needed if you aren't voting by post.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/explainers-64877005
-
.
-
.
-
.
-
Don't know how likely this is, though nothing about the Tories surprises me any more (from The Guardian live blog).
The senior Conservative MP reportedly told Hope:
Today has clearly been an absolute disaster but the election is NOT irrevocable; up until the point of the Dissolution of parliament - when the writs are moved to begin the contests, it can still be aborted.
“In other words, if enough Tory MPs, who are clearly going to lose their seats in this already utterly shambolic campaign, write to Sir Graham Brady, tomorrow , the election could still be revoked.”
-
Don't know how likely this is, though nothing about the Tories surprises me any more (from The Guardian live blog).
If they did that, I suspect we'd see a similar result to 1993 Canadian election for the Conservatives whenever it was held.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_Canadian_federal_election
-
Henry Hill from Conservative Home on Sunak's .... erm....unusual decision:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/23/july-general-election-tory-mps-may-october
-
Henry Hill from Conservative Home on Sunak's .... erm....unusual decision:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/23/july-general-election-tory-mps-may-october
I don't think Steve Bray's speakers are tinny. Quite a lot of people upset that he wasn't immediately stopped and arrested. Had it been someone doing it to Starmer if he was PM they would, I suspect, have said that if someone was stopped and arrested for it that it was evidence of a police state.
-
'No Rwanda flights before election, says Rishi Sunak' - in other words, 'you'll only get them if you're good and that way we get to see if they work in the way I claim'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69052507
-
I hope I am wrong, but it seems to me that one obvious reason to call the election now would be if Sunk knew something very bad is going to happen in August.
-
I hope I am wrong, but it seems to me that one obvious reason to call the election now would be if Sunk knew something very bad is going to happen in August.
I think the August inflation figures won't be as good as we have now because the drop in energy costs last summer will work there way out of the system.
-
Nigel Farage not standing again:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-nigel-farage-not-stand-32873398
Lily-Livered, yellow belly comes to mind.
-
"Apres moi, le deluge"
-
A Yank view.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/22/world/europe/uk-election-sunak-politics.html
-
We've called a General Election by mistake
-
Nigel Farage not standing again:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-nigel-farage-not-stand-32873398
Lily-Livered, yellow belly comes to mind.
Indeed, but why should he bother if he can swan about feeling important in the US. Farage has got his major achievement done, and being an MP even were he elected would be too much like work.
-
I think the August inflation figures won't be as good as we have now because the drop in energy costs last summer will work there way out of the system.
And if interest rates stay the same or are only down by .25%, then more people moving out of previously low deals into higher ones. I think it's known bad/disappointing news with no known good news.
-
Indeed, but why should he bother if he can swan about feeling important in the US. Farage has got his major achievement done, and being an MP even were he elected would be too much like work.
He's said that he won't stand as a candidate, but he will help with the campaign. That second part is the most important here - whether he actually does anything at a national level to help Reform or is largely absent. If the former then I think he will be more effective for Reform than if he was a candidate in a single seat.
-
He's said that he won't stand as a candidate, but he will help with the campaign. That second part is the most important here - whether he actually does anything at a national level to help Reform or is largely absent. If the former then I think he will be more effective for Reform than if he was a candidate in a single seat.
Agreed. I suspect though that he'll do more in the US as it will be easier for him to make money there.
-
I'm interested to see if there's an expansion of the use of the phrase 'environmental dogma' that Sunak used in his
suicide note speech yesterday. I think it could be a key means to increase their vote if they expand on it. People aren't going to vote Tory because they like their green policies, and they'll lose votes to Reform on it, if they don't look as if they are different from the Labour Party.
-
'Rishi Sunak's smoking ban bill set to be shelved due to election' . Will be fascinating to see if, given the indications that it's going to be in the manifesto, whether all candidates actually stick by it when questioned on it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69053763
-
One thing I should have noted during Starmer's statement last night, do you think that he's had a flag carrier at all events in the last few months just in case?
-
Vote Dalek
https://youtu.be/p4-X8-luDLc?si=34QClj5MQsDNqa1C
-
Agreed. I suspect though that he'll do more in the US as it will be easier for him to make money there.
True - but it isn't either/or is it. If he chooses Farage can do serious national-level campaigning here for Reform, but done and dusted by early July and then head over to the states for the critical period of their campaign through the Autumn up to November.
Had Sunak called an election for October then Farage couldn't have done both - he would have needed to opt for one or the other. And I guess being able to claim (rightly or wrongly) that he'd had a major input into booting out an incumbent leader in the UK will increase his stock in the US.
-
True - but it isn't either/or is it. If he chooses Farage can do serious national-level campaigning here for Reform, but done and dusted by early July and then head over to the states for the critical period of their campaign through the Autumn up to November.
Had Sunak called an election for October then Farage couldn't have done both - he would have needed to opt for one or the other. And I guess being able to claim (rightly or wrongly) that he'd had a major input into booting out an incumbent leader in the UK will increase his stock in the US.
Maybe he cut Sunak in on his earnings.
-
Maybe he cut Sunak in on his earnings.
Don't think he needs it somehow - he's richer than the King don't ya know.
-
Voters in Northern Ireland have their own election
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clkk0r19ev3o
-
'Things Can Only Get Better storms charts after drowning out Rishi Sunak' - D:Ream's pensions get better
https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/23/brian-cox-pokes-fun-rishi-sunak-d-reams-chart-resurgence-20894081/
-
'Rishi Sunak scores own goal in chat with Welsh workers', probably followed up by asking which of their houses were they going to be cheering for England in. ::)
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/rishi-sunak-scores-own-goal-in-chat-with-welsh-workers/ar-BB1mVHmu
-
Corbyn in Islington North will be fun
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c033z38m849o
-
.
-
Useful chart
-
.
I was talking to a friend about this yesterday. I said “who could have predicted in 2015 that we would have had five different prime ministers by now”. He said “yes, and who could have predicted that Theresa May would be the best one.”
-
I was talking to a friend about this yesterday. I said “who could have predicted in 2015 that we would have had five different prime ministers by now”. He said “yes, and who could have predicted that Theresa May would be the best one.”
Not sure that best is an appropriate term in this classification. 'Least shite'?
-
Did Sunak lie to the mother of a man killed in the Manchester Arena bomb 4 hours before he announced the election?
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/martyn-s-law-figen-murray-says-she-feels-misled-by-rishi-sunak-over-broken-promises/ar-BB1mZOoD
-
Michael Gove stepping down
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/michael-gove-to-stand-down-at-general-election/ar-BB1n05pJ
-
Jonathan Freedland - Make this the punishment election. Powerful article, but not sure what he wants us to do, other than not vote Tory.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/24/punishment-election-tories-voters-lies
-
Jonathan Freedland - Make this the punishment election. Powerful article, but not sure what he wants us to do, other than not vote Tory.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/24/punishment-election-tories-voters-lies
As much tactical voting as possible is what I think he's getting at.
-
Ppity Gove has decided to stand down - I'd've loved to see him having a Portillo moment on election night.
-
Ppity Gove has decided to stand down - I'd've loved to see him having a Portillo moment on election night.
Wasn't going to happen so just enjoy this. I suspect Michael is off to make himself very rich, and that his anti semitism speech this week was in the way of an advert.
-
Jam at some unspecified time in the far future
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c100n7djyr6o
-
From Ben Jennings
-
Just googled to find out who my Tory candidate is, now that puce-faced oaf "Sir" Mike Penning is joining the many Tory MPs standing down. He is some young whippersnapper who can't spell his own name, called Jaymey McIvor. The local Tories don't seem to be doing much campaigning on his behalf: maybe they've written Hemel off, and are concentrating their efforts on more winnable nearby seats..
In other news, yes, it probably is. (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/is-sunak-s-election-campaign-the-worst-in-history/ar-BB1n1YId?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=ce68b2ebda1642b6b5a42174d1ec0c2b&ei=24)
-
Just googled to find out who my Tory candidate is, now that puce-faced oaf "Sir" Mike Penning is joining the many Tory MPs standing down. He is some young whippersnapper who can't spell his own name, called Jaymey McIvor. The local Tories don't seem to be doing much campaigning on hid behalf: maybe they've written Hemel off, and are concentrating their efforts on more winnable nearby seats..
In other news, yes, it probably is. (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/is-sunak-s-election-campaign-the-worst-in-history/ar-BB1n1YId?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=ce68b2ebda1642b6b5a42174d1ec0c2b&ei=24)
The seat I was in is no longer. It's not been redrawn, it's disappeared, it has ceased to be, it has shuffled off.... etc etc.
The bit I'm in has been folded into Glasgow East. The MP for the current Glasgow East seat is the SNP candidate this time. The SNP for my current seat, Alison Thewliss, was in the run off with him but lost, though they did get another redrawn seat to be a candidate in as 'sex pest' Patrick Grady the MP for that seat is moving on - for obvious reasons.
The day after the vote happened - beginning of last year, the MP David Linden came round canvassing his potential new constituents. I was impressed - first time been canvassed in 15 years, and first time by the MP or candidate in over 35 years
I suspect though he's toast. I would think it will be a Labour seat. Their candidate is a partner in a law firm. Doesn't appear to have much connection with the seat.
My vote will be dependent on the candidate's view on women's rights to sex based spaces.
-
Quite right too. Only thing to do with them, if you ask me.
-
Labour going to lower the voting age to 16?
https://archive.fo/Ldd1x
-
The surprise election seems likely to mean that there will be a few candidates who might not be completely vetted. Given the problems with recent by elections, it will be interesting to see what effect any scandals might have.
-
Tories to bring back 'National Service'.
It seems the sort of gamble they need to make to try and shake stuff up.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpddxy9r4mdo
-
Blatant appeal to the blimpiish tendency.
-
Cost estimated at 2.5 billion. Number of 18 year olds 717252. This equates to an outlay of £3485 per person. Will those who opt for National Service with the armed forces get remuneration out of that amount? How will overstretched services like the NHS afford the staff to guide 18-year-olds through their voluntary service - or will they end up serving tea for the RVS? All these questions and more will never be answered.
The last time the Tories promised a Royal Commission (Criminal Justice System) it never happened.
-
Cost estimated at 2.5 billion. Number of 18 year olds 717252. This equates to an outlay of £3485 per person. Will those who opt for National Service with the armed forces get remuneration out of that amount? How will overstretched services like the NHS afford the staff to guide 18-year-olds through their voluntary service - or will they end up serving tea for the RVS? All these questions and more will never be answered.
The last time the Tories promised a Royal Commission (Criminal Justice System) it never happened.
Oh it's utter bollocks but symbolic bollocks is their only hope, other than it being discovered that Starmer wrote the Space Babies episode of Doctor Who, while giving Charles and Kate cancer, and mind controlling Paula Vennells while she was in charge of the Post Office.
It would appear from Cleverley on Kuennsberg that it is complete fagpacketry as well as he appears to know very little about it - plus ça change...
-
Now trying to figure out how it is mandatory given that there will be no sanction for not taking part according to Cleverly.
-
Now trying to figure out how it is mandatory given that there will be no sanction for not taking part according to Cleverly.
He doesn't know because it's just been a panicked unthoughtout announcement on which they give precisely the wrong amount of detail.
-
Presumably it is an idea (and that is all it seems to be) that they think will appeal to voters of a certain age and whose social outlook remains grounded in the 1950's - it just makes the Tories look increasingly hapless, and you'd have thought that one of their advisors would have stopped this from being announced until it had been thought through - even just a little.
They must surely be running out of feet to shoot themselves in.
-
Presumably it is an idea (and that is all it seems to be) that they think will appeal to voters of a certain age and whose social outlook remains grounded in the 1950's - it just makes the Tories look increasingly hapless, and you'd have thought that one of their advisors would have stopped this from being announced until it had been thought through - even just a little.
They must surely be running out of feet to shoot themselves in.
There's a germ of a good idea if you do the work and tie it in with more support, and rejigged idea of apprenticeship, and looking at universities and how we use them. But that's a lot of work, a complex idea, and hard to soundbite as opposed to this which is only a soundbite, no idea, and no work.
-
..
-
MP 'suspended after endorsing Reform UK candidate' - so much unity at the Tory Party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0kkzv12wndo
-
.
-
'Abbott Labour race row probe finished in December', bit of a farce really now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8vv4ep92y8o
-
'Abbott Labour race row probe finished in December', bit of a farce really now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8vv4ep92y8o
Fucking ridiculous.
-
I'm getting a bit pissed off by various Tories bleating about Labour 'not having a plan' - they've been in power for 14 years now so, presumably, we can assume the current situation is exactly as they planned it would be.
-
I'm getting a bit pissed off by various Tories bleating about Labour 'not having a plan' - they've been in power for 14 years now so, presumably, we can assume the current situation is exactly as they planned it would be.
Yes. Clearly a soundbite they have been told to push. Mind you if I hear Rachel Reeves say she is "laser-focused" one more time I may need to invest in a new TV.
-
I'm getting a bit pissed off by various Tories bleating about Labour 'not having a plan' - they've been in power for 14 years now so, presumably, we can assume the current situation is exactly as they planned it would be.
There's no acceptance of their actions. Either it was the world's fault, or the nasty Liz Truss, or they were mind controlled by Jeremy Corbyn. Cleverley's performance on Kuennsberg was a litany of lying.
-
Yes. Clearly a soundbite they have been told to push. Mind you if I hear Rachel Reeves say she is "laser-focused" one more time I may need to invest in a new TV.
Most of them are unwatchable. Reeves's great quality here is that she comes across as if she could be a story. For an election that appealing to those voters who left Labour to vote Tory, that's a positive, no matter what I might like.
-
BBC reporting that Abbott is being allowed back as a Labour MP but that the deal is she doesn't stand for election.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69040616
-
BBC reporting that Abbott is being allowed back as a Labour MP but that the deal is she doesn't stand for election.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-69040616
Abbott has texted BBC to confirm she is banned from standing. Labour Party look weak in not controlling the information, vindictive in their actions, and not transparent if the case was decided in December.
-
.
-
'Tories would swap 'rip-off' degrees for apprenticeships' - rather like their national service fagpacketry, there is a germ of a good idea here but they can't be bothered to do the work and are going for the soundbite. University education needs a general review but it should be about fitting it into an overall strategy not this which looks like a mess.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clmmry99y4po
-
'Tories would swap 'rip-off' degrees for apprenticeships' - rather like their national service fagpacketry, there is a germ of a good idea here but they can't be bothered to do the work and are going for the soundbite. University education needs a general review but it should be about fitting it into an overall strategy not this which looks like a mess.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clmmry99y4po
What they have failed to mention is that the current apprenticeship levy that companies pay is woefully underutilised to provide apprentice training. So recently there was around £3B in unspent levy available to fund more apprenticeships. So it is disingenuous in the extreme to imply that money needs to be diverted from University funding (I'll come back to that later) to fund more apprenticeships. The money is already there.
I have a very strong professional interest in this area and the reasons why companies don't take on more apprentices is because they need a business reason so to do as, although the training costs are covered by the levy, they are employees and there wages need to be covered by the company. No company will take on more staff, particularly in the current economic environment, unless they need to do so.
There is another problem - the current apprenticeship system is very inflexible and bureaucratic - it takes years to get a new apprenticeship scheme approved and typically this is very rigid so doesn't provide the nimble and flexible approach companies need in a fast changing world to upskill and reskill their workforces. I have been in many meetings with various Education ministers over the past 5 years or so making these very points (along with industry leaders making the same points). But they have fallen on deaf ears.
Back to university funding - the government does not fund the fees - these are covered by student loans so I'm struggling to understand how the government can divert student loan money to apprenticeships (which are not funded via that route).
-
What they have failed to mention is that the current apprenticeship levy that companies pay is woefully underutilised to provide apprentice training. So recently there was around £3B in unspent levy available to fund more apprenticeships. So it is disingenuous in the extreme to imply that money needs to be diverted from University funding (I'll come back to that later) to fund more apprenticeships. The money is already there.
I have a very strong professional interest in this area and the reasons why companies don't take on more apprentices is because they need a business reason so to do as, although the training costs are covered by the levy, they are employees and there wages need to be covered by the company. No company will take on more staff, particularly in the current economic environment, unless they need to do so.
There is another problem - the current apprenticeship system is very inflexible and bureaucratic - it takes years to get a new apprenticeship scheme approved and typically this is very rigid so doesn't provide the nimble and flexible approach companies need in a fast changing world to upskill and reskill their workforces. I have been in many meetings with various Education ministers over the past 5 years or so making these very points (along with industry leaders making the same points). But they have fallen on deaf ears.
Back to university funding - the government does not fund the fees - these are covered by student loans so I'm struggling to understand how the government can divert student loan money to apprenticeships (which are not funded via that route).
Applaud.
The national service thing is in terms of what is trying to be addressed related but sticking 2 backs of a fagpacket together is beyond the Tories it would seem.
Their 'Royal Commission' should be looking at all of the issues you've highlighted, and how that would apply if you wanted to add in some form of citizenship duty. If they had been thinking ahead, a semi coherent semi costed grand plan could have been rolled our. So far, I get the picture of some panicked brainstorming where they all decided to drown their sorrows afterwards with a suitcase of booze.
-
Abbott has texted BBC to confirm she is banned from standing. Labour Party look weak in not controlling the information, vindictive in their actions, and not transparent if the case was decided in December.
Starmer saying she isn't banned from standing. Message definitely not being managed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-69072113
-
'ITV to host first general election leaders' debate' with Sunak and Starmer. I hate these presidential style debates in a non presidential election.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqee7mdm5llo
-
Applaud.
The national service thing is in terms of what is trying to be addressed related but sticking 2 backs of a fagpacket together is beyond the Tories it would seem.
Their 'Royal Commission' should be looking at all of the issues you've highlighted, and how that would apply if you wanted to add in some form of citizenship duty. If they had been thinking ahead, a semi coherent semi costed grand plan could have been rolled our. So far, I get the picture of some panicked brainstorming where they all decided to drown their sorrows afterwards with a suitcase of booze.
I don't think the two issues are related at all.
Apprenticeships aren't just for 18 year-olds, nope they are also for 16 year olds and for people who are already comfortably in their careers - for example if you are already a graduate you might do a level 7 (masters level) apprenticeship.
And there is a broader in-work skills agenda that the apprenticeship levy should also be addressing. Increasingly employers want their employees to upskill in the form of 'micro-credentials' of short courses that bundle together to form a broader qualification. This can be at any time in the employees working life.
And if you are an employer with an apprentice, you are paying them - so quite reasonably you will expect their contracted hours to be spent either doing their job or released from they job to be getting trained in the relevant apprenticeship skills. Currently it is quite tricky to balance the work hours and off the job (but in contracted hours) study/training time. Employers aren't going to be happy (to say the least) if the government expects them to release their apprentices to do some community service that may have no relevance to their actual employment but in their paid employed hours.
-
I don't think the two issues are related at all.
Apprenticeships aren't just for 18 year-olds, nope they are also for 16 year olds and for people who are already comfortably in their careers - for example if you are already a graduate you might do a level 7 (masters level) apprenticeship.
And there is a broader in-work skills agenda that the apprenticeship levy should also be addressing. Increasingly employers want their employees to upskill in the form of 'micro-credentials' of short courses that bundle together to form a broader qualification. This can be at any time in the employees working life.
And if you are an employer with an apprentice, you are paying them - so quite reasonably you will expect their contracted hours to be spent either doing their job or released from they job to be getting trained in the relevant apprenticeship skills. Currently it is quite tricky to balance the work hours and off the job (but in contracted hours) study/training time. Employers aren't going to be happy (to say the least) if the government expects them to release their apprentices to do some community service that may have no relevance to their actual employment but in their paid employed hours.
The unthought out proposals are related to the same questions being asked about what is the best for business, for young people, for the country, for their education.
Your last paragraph argues that they should be joined up because of the impact of one upon the other
-
Suspended MP won't stand at general election, not Abbott but Geraint Davies
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg33ndx10gvo
-
Russell-Moyle suspended and won't be allowed to stand. Can't say I'm broken hearted
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5114q1x09eo
-
Political journalist standing for Labour in Rochdale. Good luck to him. Hope the vetting was good.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy99vwzgjnko
-
"Tax online giants to help kids' mental health, say Lib Dems" - I note Labour's taxing private schools money seems to be being used for another thing here. I understand the drive to show policies are fully funded but it ends up giving an impression of widely hypothecation taxes which doesn't apply. And while I don't doubt the Lib Dems have good intentions, it doesn't look at mental health as an issue that one should have a strategy on but a series of tactical sticking plasters.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crggq5jpx5do
-
"Faiza Shaheen not endorsed to be Labour candidate in east London amid questions over social media posts". Is there a cull on left wingers" as Abbott claims?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/faiza-shaheen-not-endorsed-to-be-labour-candidate-in-east-london-amid-questions-over-social-media-posts/ar-BB1nhPG1
-
John Crace on Rish!:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/29/rishi-sunak-farewell-tour-reveals-true-meaning-of-futility
Still giggling.
-
More on the 'cull of left wingers'. I think Jeremy Hunt's line is a clever one "If Keir Starmer can't deal with Diane Abbott, how on Earth is he going to deal with Vladimir Putin?"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c800pzlz9k8o
-
John Crace on Rish!:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/29/rishi-sunak-farewell-tour-reveals-true-meaning-of-futility
Still giggling.
Can't believe there's another six weeks of this shite.
-
Can't believe there's another six weeks of this shite.
Cheer up - it's only five weeks.
-
Cheer up - it's only five weeks.
Hurrah
-
I think I'll vote with my heart, and go Green. They're the only party that honestly says they would raise taxes, which is necessary to fund the NHS and other essentials. Closing loopholes is all very well, but more is needed.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/30/labour-to-face-fresh-attack-from-green-party-in-key-seats-in-election
-
I think I'll vote with my heart, and go Green. They're the only party that honestly says they would raise taxes, which is necessary to fund the NHS and other essentials. Closing loopholes is all very well, but more is needed.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/may/30/labour-to-face-fresh-attack-from-green-party-in-key-seats-in-election
Given their anti women policies, and desire to allow medical experimentation on children because of the anti scientific religion of gender, it's a no from me.
-
Can't believe there's another six weeks of this shite.
I assume you are talking about the election campaign, not the article, which I found entertaining.
Just checked Electoral Calculus
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html
The probability section is interesting. They are no longer even citing Tory prospects.
-
The gap may narrow as we approach July 4th, but the Tories are certainly in for a well-deserved hiding.
-
I assume you are talking about the election campaign, not the article, which I found entertaining.
Just checked Electoral Calculus
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html
The probability section is interesting. They are no longer even citing Tory prospects.
Yep, the election campaign and these highly choreographed, deeply pointless wittering appearances.
I suppose the lack of movement in the polls after the election was announced removed a known unknown and now it looks impossible for the Tories to have chances. Now it's only the unknown unknowns that can help them.
-
More on the 'cull of left wingers'. It's really difficult to work out what, if any, effect this will have on voting. My feeling is other than in specific constituencies very little.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv22n56e3z6o
-
"Faisal Islam: Election tax row is a phony war" - good article on the issue of fiscal drag by not raising tax thresholds.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw55vxlyd29o
-
Yep, the election campaign and these highly choreographed, deeply pointless wittering appearances.
I suppose the lack of movement in the polls after the election was announced removed a known unknown and now it looks impossible for the Tories to have chances. Now it's only the unknown unknowns that can help them.
I think the polls will turn out to be a bit optimistic (for Labour) because people tend to lie a little bit if they are planning to vote for an unpopular party. However, I can't see the Tories not getting as jolly good trouncing.
-
I think the polls will turn out to be a bit optimistic (for Labour) because people tend to lie a little bit if they are planning to vote for an unpopular party. However, I can't see the Tories not getting as jolly good trouncing.
Indeed - the so-called "shy Tory syndrome".
-
Indeed - the so-called "shy Tory syndrome".
Over on politicalbetting.com there is a lot of discussion of the methodology of the various pollsters and how they deal with (or don't deal with) those who say don't know. The pollsters that reallocate typically show smaller leads as the reallocation is largely to the tories from 2019 tory voters.
But I think pollsters have a real problem if they baseline everything on the 2019 election as that was such a weird, one issue (plus Boris vs Corbyn) election. So to presume that 2019 tory voters are somehow 'historically' tory and even though they may say 'don't know' at the moment many will fold back into the tories seems a tad naive. We know that a considerable number of 2019 tory voters were either first time tories or were typical non-voters. Hence the red wall falling. Will these voters 'fold back' into voting tory (as they did in 2019) or 'fold back' into not voting or voting labour as they likely did in 2017, 2015 etc?
To my mind 2017 is maybe a better baseline to use as a starting point for consideration of the 2024 predictions than 2019.
-
Retiring Tory MP backs Labour and says he would think about standing for them. Tory party kick into smear mode - and who knows they might be right about him asking for a peerage but not exactly the advert for unity they would be hoping for.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd11kvk1je4o
-
"'Labour pledges clean power push 'within months'' - interesting that this exposes one of the gaps between the SNP and the Greens.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9xxpypr8d0o
-
.
-
'Fly-tippers to get points on driving licence, Tories promise' - bringing out the big political promises now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cedd9l00leyo
-
'Diane Abbott free to stand for Labour, says Starmer' and yet for all this week people, including Starmer, have been stating it's up to the NEC and he doesn't control them. This may actually be the worst mess they could have made since it's passed off the left wing, who are celebrating, and this means it can be made to look like he caved by the Tories. Overall badly managed, but probably not significant enough to have a real effect.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy00npvpmzpo
-
'Diane Abbott free to stand for Labour, says Starmer' and yet for all this week people, including Starmer, have been stating it's up to the NEC and he doesn't control them. This may actually be the worst mess they could have made since it's passed off the left wing, who are celebrating, and this means it can be made to look like he caved by the Tories. Overall badly managed, but probably not significant enough to have a real effect.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy00npvpmzpo
I don't disagree that it has been badly managed, but I don't think there is contradiction. Since Abbott's suspension was revoked a few days ago she has been free to put herself forward to stand in Hackney for Labour (or for that matter in any other seat where the Labour candidate has not been confirmed). However my understanding is that at this point final decisions on who is selected to stand in a particular constituency from those who applied rests with the NEC, which isn't controlled by Starmer.
So he has been correct in saying that she hadn't been blocked - she can throw her hat into the ring and apply to be the candidate in Hackney, but the ultimate decision as to whether she is finally selected as candidate is for the NEC.
-
'Fly-tippers to get points on driving licence, Tories promise' - bringing out the big political promises now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cedd9l00leyo
Hmm ... and there was me thinking that there are already fines for fly tipping and the issue is that it is impossible to enforce due to it being very, very low priority for the police.
So it seems irrelevant whether the sanction for being caught is a fine or 3 points on your licence ... if you are never going to get caught in the first place.
-
Hmm ... and there was me thinking that there are already fines for fly tipping and the issue is that it is impossible to enforce due to it being very, very low priority for the police.
So it seems irrelevant whether the sanction for being caught is a fine or 3 points on your licence ... if you are never going to get caught in the first place.
And even without that, not exactly a vision for Britain.
-
Too misogynist for the Scottish Greens - high bar but this bloke managed it.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/politics/6486604/sophie-molly-greens/
-
And even without that, not exactly a vision for Britain.
If someone proposed filling the potholes with the fly tipped rubbish then they'd really be on to something.
-
If someone proposed filling the potholes with the fly tipped rubbish then they'd really be on to something.
Done by those on 'national service'?
-
Done by those on 'national service'?
Or as part of an apprenticeship rather than on a traditional university BSc in Pot-hole filling.
-
Or as part of an apprenticeship rather than on a traditional university BSc in Pot-hole filling.
Surely that's a Ph.F
-
'Lib Dems aim to grab attention with campaign stunts' - makes a sort of sense but another 5 weeks of it may well become a bit grating. Even if they gain a few seats, if there's a big majority in the HoC they seem irrelevant.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c844p844eqxo
-
On the subject of National Service
https://youtu.be/ahgjEjJkZks?si=kHuFythLB_CiqM4l
-
'Is Labour's 2030 green energy goal realistic and how would it affect bills?'
Part of me appreciates a goal that would almost be in the lifetime of the parliament the election would apply to, after ones 20 and 30 years in the future which are hard to mark against. It does feel as though it's in place to be earlier than the Tories commitment rather than being properly worked out.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmjjy17284vo
-
'Lib Dems aim to grab attention with campaign stunts' - makes a sort of sense but another 5 weeks of it may well become a bit grating. Even if they gain a few seats, if there's a big majority in the HoC they seem irrelevant.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c844p844eqxo
Why do the Lib Dems still exist? There's no real difference between them and the Labour centre-left, so why don't they merge with Labour, and stop splitting the Left-wing vote?
-
More on the 'cull of left wingers'. I think Jeremy Hunt's line is a clever one "If Keir Starmer can't deal with Diane Abbott, how on Earth is he going to deal with Vladimir Putin?"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c800pzlz9k8o
Good until you remember Tories failing to deal with Putin over the Crimea, the failure of sanctions etc.
-
Good until you remember Tories failing to deal with Putin over the Crimea, the failure of sanctions etc.
You miss the point of such lines.
ETA - and effectively it then says, we may be shite but given Starmer's inability to deal with Abbott, he's guaranteed to be shittier.
-
Why do the Lib Dems still exist? There's no real difference between them and the Labour centre-left, so why don't they merge with Labour, and stop splitting the Left-wing vote?
I was just saying something similar. There's not enough gap between Labour and Tories for them to sit in the middle, if they go left of Labour, the position is taken by the Greens. They might commit to return to the EU but that would probably make them less likely to take the seats from the Tories that they are targeting.
-
You miss the point of such lines.
Sadly I don’t think I do. It means a country where it’s easy to forget the acts of politicians while applauding their linguistic and political flourish.
-
You miss the point of such lines.
ETA - and effectively it then says, we may be shite but given Starmer's inability to deal with Abbott, he's guaranteed to be shittier.
How are they dealing with Truss, how did they deal with Johnson?
-
Sadly I don’t think I do. It means a country where it’s easy to forget the acts of politicians while applauding their linguistic and political flourish.
Don't think you've got it. It is simply a way to shore up what they perceive as their vote. Instilling a bit of fear in the waverers.
-
Sadly I don’t think I do. It means a country where it’s easy to forget the acts of politicians while applauding their linguistic and political flourish.
What would Starmer have done to stop Putin that would have been different from the Tories?
-
How are they dealing with Truss, how did they deal with Johnson?
You are confused by your tribalism in creating the strawman of noting an effective line as saying that the Tories are perfect.
-
What would Starmer have done to stop Putin that would have been different from the Tories?
Exactly, there is no “dealing with Putin in the way Hunt is trying to paint”.
What Hunt is saying is like “who do you back in a fight with a bear, Sunak or Starmer.?”
-
Exactly, there is no “dealing with Putin in the way Hunt is trying to paint”.
What Hunt is saying is like “who do you back in a fight with a bear, Sunak or Starmer.?”
And given the mismanagement of Abbott, who do you? It's a perfectly valid point to draw attention to failings in minor issues as indicative of how someone might perform in more important ones.
-
And given the mismanagement of Abbott, who do you? It's a perfectly valid point to draw attention to failings in minor issues as indicative of how someone might perform in more important ones.
I think Starmer. Sunak is a Hindu and believes he will be reincarnated. Starmer is fighting for the one life he has.
Sunak then, as usual has little ‘skin in the game’ indeed, if the results of his previous incarnation are anything to go by he’s in for a fantastic future.
-
I think Starmer. Sunak is a Hindu and believes he will be reincarnated. Starmer is fighting for the one life he has.
Sunak then, as usual has little ‘skin in the game’ indeed, if the results of his previous incarnation are anything to go by he’s in for a fantastic future.
Oh look, sectarianism,and racism.
Is that you, Nigel?
-
Oh look, sectarianism,and racism.
Is that you, Nigel?
How racism? You don’t have to be any particular race to be a Hindu.
I just outlined beliefs.
-
How racism? You don’t have to be any particular race to be a Hindu.
I just outlined beliefs.
So it's just the sectarianism then?
You're line is just as xenophobic as any of the racist drivel Farage and his supporters come out with.
-
So it's just the sectarianism then?
You're line is just as xenophobic as any of the racist drivel Farage and his supporters come out with.
No it isn’t.
In terms of sectarianism. Sunak is a theist and Starmer is an atheist and I am backing him in a fight with a bear.
-
'Lib Dems call for more Premier League games on free TV' - well, here's the reason for the Lib Dems
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c900kqxw1lzo
-
No it isn’t.
In terms of sectarianism. Sunak is a theist and Starmer is an atheist and I am backing him in a fight with a bear.
And you wouldn't say that about Christianity so you are sectarian, and it's about one of those 'strange foreign' religions so you are a racist.
-
And you wouldn't say that about Christianity so you are sectarian, and it's about one of those 'strange foreign' religions so you are a racist.
You’ve lost me and you’ve got form in extreme accusations vis supporting the murder of gays and rejoicing in the death of people.
-
Could the Tories be heading for a wipeout on the scale of the Canadian Conservatives in 1993? Probably not, but a chap can dream...
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/rishi-sunak-truth-canada-1993-080421361.html
-
And you wouldn't say that about Christianity so you are sectarian, and it's about one of those 'strange foreign' religions so you are a racist.
Hinduism is an ideology, and we are allowed to criticise, and even make fun of up to a point, ideologies. If the two party leaders were a Christian and an atheist, I dare say Walt would have made the same point. After all, he was only stating a fact about Hindu belief.
-
Hinduism is an ideology, and we are allowed to criticise, and even make fun of up to a point, ideologies. If the two party leaders were a Christian and an atheist, I dare say Walt would have made the same point. After all, he was only stating a fact about Hindu belief.
His past posting where he criticises the idea of secular society would indicate that you are wrong about his position on Christianity. He didn't just criticise Hinduism, he stated that Sunak being a Hindu was a problem.
-
You’ve lost me and you’ve got form in extreme accusations vis supporting the murder of gays and rejoicing in the death of people.
can't argue against so you try a bit of lying.
-
Could the Tories be heading for a wipeout on the scale of the Canadian Conservatives in 1993? Probably not, but a chap can dream...
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/rishi-sunak-truth-canada-1993-080421361.html
I'm just hoping for lots of Portillo moments.
Perhaps we should compile a top ten list of those we might hope would lose. To be honest, top of my list isn't a Tory.
-
Galloway?
He's definitely one of mine.
-
Top of my list is Mike Penning: not because he's an exceptionally bad MP for a Tory Brexiter, but because he's my Tory MP, and I'd like a Labour MP.
-
Galloway?
Pretty sure he'll be out, replaced by Labour. Good riddance, but he's quite low on my list.
-
Galloway?
He's definitely one of mine.
Yep, lying, dangerous grifter.
-
Latest opinion poll from The Observer/Guardian:
Labour 45% – up four points on last weekend
Conservatives 25% - down 2.
Reform 11% up 1.
Lib Dems 8% down 2.
Greens 6% down 1.
-
Was looking at Oddschecker for odds on individual constituencies, and going through them one of the ones I looked for was Rochdale, Gallowy's constituency but it doesn't appear. Now I haven't checked that all others are there but there is a great long list, and all the other 8 I looked for were there.
-
Hardly a surprise that Labour are talking about bringing down net migration but the lack of a target feels as if it's cowardice, and trying to be all things for all views.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn331vd99lzo
-
Why do the Lib Dems still exist? There's no real difference between them and the Labour centre-left, so why don't they merge with Labour, and stop splitting the Left-wing vote?
Much as everybody wants it to be, politics is not based on a single line. The Line Dems are not identical with any single part of Labour. If a party can make a case for people to vote for it and actually get votes, it is not for you or anybody else to tell them they should not exist.
-
Latest opinion poll from The Observer/Guardian:
Labour 45% – up four points on last weekend
Conservatives 25% - down 2.
Reform 11% up 1.
Lib Dems 8% down 2.
Greens 6% down 1.
Electoral Calculus (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html) predicts 66 seats for the Tories with a best case (from a Tory point of view) of 225 and a worst case of 37.
-
Much as everybody wants it to be, politics is not based on a single line. The Line Dems are not identical with any single part of Labour. If a party can make a case for people to vote for it and actually get votes, it is not for you or anybody else to tell them they should not exist.
But it is for Steve or anyone to be able to say something like that in a democracy. He's not stopping them existing, he can't so I don't see the point of your comment.
-
Election fraud claims being reviewed by police - interesting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1eewd5xgjgo
-
But it is for Steve or anyone to be able to say something like that in a democracy.
Of course he can say it. But it's a stupid thing to say
He's not stopping them existing,
But he is expressing a sentiment that they shouldn't.
I don't see the point of your comment.
To point out that trying to wish away a political party simply because you believe it is a duplication of effort is a pointless exercise and probably a bit offensive to the members and supporters of that party.
-
Election fraud claims being reviewed by police - interesting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1eewd5xgjgo
Well that was a stupid thing to do: put an advert out that is trying to mislead people into thinking you are from an opposition party.
-
Of course he can say it. But it's a stupid thing to say
But he is expressing a sentiment that they shouldn't.
To point out that trying to wish away a political party simply because you believe it is a duplication of effort is a pointless exercise and probably a bit offensive to the members and supporters of that party.
And telling someone that they shouldn't say something because it may be offensive seems hypocritical.
-
Election fraud claims being reviewed by police - interesting.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1eewd5xgjgo
Does this pillock really expect us to believe that Labour and Reform voters are abandoning their parties to vote for him, when in the rest of the country it's the other way round?
-
Even Tories can't be wrong about everything, though they try damned hard to be.
-
And telling someone that they shouldn't say something because it may be offensive seems hypocritical.
Stop doing it then.
-
Stop doing it then.
I didn't, you have
-
'TikTok users being fed misleading election news, BBC finds'. Have they found a media platform where this doesn't happen?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1ww6vz1l81o
-
This article in the Guardian shows that my constituency, Hemel Hempstead (which is significantly different from 2019, despite keeping the same name) is only Labour's 123rd most winnable seat, and will need a 26.8% swing to take it from the Tories. The Labour bloke, David Taylor, is putting in a huge campaigning effort, whereas the Tory, Jaymey McIvor, who is a local and county councillor in Essex and has no previous connection with Hemel Hempstead, seems to have given up - we've heard very little from him. Odd, since the seat is still holdable by the Tories, I'd've thought.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2024/feb/20/general-election-uk-opinion-polls-seats-tories-lose
-
This article in the Guardian shows that my constituency, Hemel Hempstead (which is significantly different from 2019, despite keeping the same name) is only Labour's 123rd most winnable seat, and will need a 26.8% swing to take it from the Tories. The Labour bloke, David Taylor, is putting in a huge campaigning effort, whereas the Tory, Jaymey McIvor, who is a local and county councillor in Essex and has no previous connection with Hemel Hempstead, seems to have given up - we've heard very little from him. Odd, since the seat is still holdable by the Tories, I'd've thought.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2024/feb/20/general-election-uk-opinion-polls-seats-tories-lose
If Labour take it, I will raise a glass to you on election morning
-
This article in the Guardian shows that my constituency, Hemel Hempstead (which is significantly different from 2019, despite keeping the same name) is only Labour's 123rd most winnable seat, and will need a 26.8% swing to take it from the Tories. The Labour bloke, David Taylor, is putting in a huge campaigning effort, whereas the Tory, Jaymey McIvor, who is a local and county councillor in Essex and has no previous connection with Hemel Hempstead, seems to have given up - we've heard very little from him. Odd, since the seat is still holdable by the Tories, I'd've thought.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2024/feb/20/general-election-uk-opinion-polls-seats-tories-lose
I'm in the neighbouring constituency of St Albans - and this reminds me of 1997 when Labour took the seat from the Tories when it would way beyond their wildest expectations. I think there are some other similarities - in 1997 Peter Lilley (the sitting MP) did the chicken run to another constituency so there wasn't an incumbent standing, which often brings some level of personal support. The Tory in HH is also new with sitting MP Mike Penning not standing.
-
Farage to make 'emergency announcement'? Is he the new James Bond?
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/live/farage-announcement-latest-news-election-reform-uk-112621866.html
-
'Starmer says he is prepared to use nuclear weapons' - not exactly a surprise.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czvvy0ppdxko
-
Farage to make 'emergency announcement'? Is he the new James Bond?
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/live/farage-announcement-latest-news-election-reform-uk-112621866.html
Farage becomes ReformUK leader
-
Farage becomes ReformUK leader
And he's standing in Clacton
-
Farage becomes ReformUK leader
And standing for parliament. Hopefully, he'll suffer his eighth defeat.
-
'Greens furious over 'outrageous' STV debate exclusion', I agree with them but then I think these things are generally bollocks.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511lgve271o
-
And he's standing in Clacton
I can't help thinking that a certain court ruling across the pond may have influenced this latest volte-face.
-
The differences on oil and gas production may well get the Tories a couple of extra seats. Very uninteresting debate generally.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0ddlkp9g9do
-
Laudable stuff from the Lib Dems but doesn't feel 'fully costed and funded' at all.
I'm getting extremely cynical about the idea of 'fully costed and funded' - not much more than some odd game where you pluck a figure from the air, pick a random possibility of where to get the money that may or may not be possible, and join them together.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjmmww3ne8wo
-
'fully costed and funded'
File alongside "laser-focussed"
-
Following on from Labour not putting a figure on immigration, and being attacked for it by the Tories, the Torues do the same.
Meanwhile Farage does put a figure on ot 'net zero' and declares that we will pull out of the ECHR which he continues, helped by the Tories, to elide with the EU.
-
Oh, and I see Cleverley when asked about whether the Tories will pull out from the ECHR says wait for the manifesto. Meanwhile we get a policy a day released into the wild. I'm inclined to a 'stay quiet' till you've published your manifesto rule as you end up talking about policy that you don't have the context for.
-
File alongside "laser-focussed"
If you got rid of them both then Rachel Reeves would be very quiet.
-
This article in the Guardian shows that my constituency, Hemel Hempstead (which is significantly different from 2019, despite keeping the same name) is only Labour's 123rd most winnable seat, and will need a 26.8% swing to take it from the Tories. The Labour bloke, David Taylor, is putting in a huge campaigning effort, whereas the Tory, Jaymey McIvor, who is a local and county councillor in Essex and has no previous connection with Hemel Hempstead, seems to have given up - we've heard very little from him. Odd, since the seat is still holdable by the Tories, I'd've thought.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2024/feb/20/general-election-uk-opinion-polls-seats-tories-lose
Electoral Calculus says there is an 80% chance it will go to Labour.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Hemel%20Hempstead
My constituency: Bristol Central, looks interesting. It's the one with Carla Denyer standing and the odds look good for her.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Bristol%20Central
I'm keeping all the election literature being posted through my door and, so far, only the Green Party and Labour have even bothered.
-
And he's standing in Clacton
That's interesting. Conservative and Labour are more or less neck and neck there. I suspect Farage will probably split the Tory vote and send the seat to Labour.
-
Electoral Calculus says there is an 80% chance it will go to Labour.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Hemel%20Hempstead
My constituency: Bristol Central, looks interesting. It's the one with Carla Denyer standing and the odds look good for her.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Bristol%20Central
I'm keeping all the election literature being posted through my door and, so far, only the Green Party and Labour have even bothered.
Having first gone to Oddschecker to see what chance of a Galloway moment and it not being there, I was triggered by your post to look on EC for it, and while it's there it doesn't seem to factor in Galloway at all.
-
Electoral Calculus says there is an 80% chance it will go to Labour.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Hemel%20Hempstead
My constituency: Bristol Central, looks interesting. It's the one with Carla Denyer standing and the odds look good for her.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Bristol%20Central
I'm keeping all the election literature being posted through my door and, so far, only the Green Party and Labour have even bothered.
Great news - thanks!
-
Great news - thanks!
Given the result last time it's quite frankly incredible that it would be 50/50 never mind 80/20.
-
'Woman arrested after drink thrown at Nigel Farage' - much as I dislike Farage, this sort of stuff is idiocy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6pp7yg0y3po
-
'Woman arrested after drink thrown at Nigel Farage' - much as I dislike Farage, this sort of stuff is idiocy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6pp7yg0y3po
Yes, it only makes people more sympathetic to him. He probably set it up himself. :P
-
Yes, it only makes people more sympathetic to him. He probably set it up himself. :P
Yup - there is some traffic on TwiX suggesting that she is a plant and it was staged - the girlfriend of the ReformUK press officer!
https://x.com/GleannIucha/status/1798023290625417293
-
Yup - there is some traffic on TwiX suggesting that she is a plant and it was staged - the girlfriend of the ReformUK press officer!
https://x.com/GleannIucha/status/1798023290625417293
She denies it
https://x.com/emilyhewertson/status/1798005077799809207
-
Faiza Shaheen resigns from Labour Party
Hmmm...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c977d5jep6eo
-
She denies it
https://x.com/emilyhewertson/status/1798005077799809207
And wasn't her
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/identity-revealed-woman-who-threw-32960862
-
So Sunak may have sort of 'won'. And yet, we may all have lost, in that they play acted.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmjjzxg7k6no
-
Oh, bad Rishi. Time to go and spend some time on the naughty step and reflect on why lying is wrong.
-
Oddschecker has Farage at 3/1 on to win in Clacton. Constituency betting markets aren't generally very liquid so are usually more influenced by overall polls but Farage has obviously attracted around 75% of the bets in a more liquid market.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/clacton
-
Oddschecker has Farage at 3/1 on to win in Clacton. Constituency betting markets aren't generally very liquid so are usually more influenced by overall polls but Farage has obviously attracted around 75% of the bets in a more liquid market.
https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/clacton
Clacton is welcome to him, if he wins - one more constituency that won't go Tory.
-
Clacton is welcome to him, if he wins - one more constituency that won't go Tory.
Fuck no. That means he'd be jumping up at every opportunity in the HoC to show his quite remarkable stupidity and bigotry.
-
Clacton is welcome to him, if he wins - one more constituency that won't go Tory.
Electoral Calculus is giving him no chance but that's because it's just based on the overall polls. I suspect he's maybe about evens at the moment rather than the 2 extremes.
I can't see a Farage/Reform win as anything other than likely to drag the Tories to the right so there would be absolutely no reason for it to be anything other than a massive disappointment. While he's not a sitting MP, he joins Galliway at the top of the list of those I hope lose.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Clacton
-
Fuck no. That means he'd be jumping up at every opportunity in the HoC to show his quite remarkable stupidity and bigotry.
If he did win, I suspect we would be seeing a Tory party with seats at the lower end of estimates, in which case, I would fear that they might seek to woo Reform and Farage by more extreme policies, and an offer of a senior shadow Cabinet post. Some would even be touting him as leader.
-
Fuck no. That means he'd be jumping up at every opportunity in the HoC to show his quite remarkable stupidity and bigotry.
I'm quite happy seeing Farage demonstrate his stupidity and bigotry at every opportunity.
-
I'm quite happy seeing Farage demonstrate his stupidity and bigotry at every opportunity.
I disagree with both you and Aruntraveller that Farage is anything like stupid. He's an astute and capable politician who is extremely bigoted grifter. He's one of 4 politicians in the UK in my lifetime who I would see as changing the political landscape. The fact that we're not voting in EU elections thus week is to a substantial part down to Farage.
-
Electoral Calculus is giving him no chance but that's because it's just based on the overall polls. I suspect he's maybe about evens at the moment rather than the 2 extremes.
I can't see a Farage/Reform win as anything other than likely to drag the Tories to the right so there would be absolutely no reason for it to be anything other than a massive disappointment. While he's not a sitting MP, he joins Galliway at the top of the list of those I hope lose.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Clacton
That page is the same as it was the day he announced he was standing and when I said "Labour and Conservatives are neck and neck". I don't think that Farage is factored into the calculation yet. I expect him (i.e. Reform) to take votes mainly off the Tories and increase Labour's winning margin.
-
I disagree with both you and Aruntraveller that Farage is anything like stupid. He's an astute and capable politician who is extremely bigoted grifter. He's one of 4 politicians in the UK in my lifetime who I would see as changing the political landscape. The fact that we're not voting in EU elections thus week is to a substantial part down to Farage.
Astute and cable politicians don't fail seven times to get elected as an MP.
-
Astute and cable politicians don't fail seven times to get elected as an MP.
And yet he has achieved much more, and had way more influence than the vast vast majority of MPs who get elected 7 times never mind once. If you look for his monument, it's called Brexit.
-
That page is the same as it was the day he announced he was standing and when I said "Labour and Conservatives are neck and neck". I don't think that Farage is factored into the calculation yet. I expect him (i.e. Reform) to take votes mainly off the Tories and increase Labour's winning margin.
I'm not sure that EC will factor in Farage specifically at any point into their calculation.
-
Line up for BBC debate with the 7 largest parties in Great Britain. Viewers in Northern Ireland have their own programme.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c877v0e86vko
-
And yet he has achieved much more, and had way more influence than the vast vast majority of MPs who get elected 7 times never mind once. If you look for his monument, it's called Brexit.
What has he achieved?
-
I'm not sure that EC will factor in Farage specifically at any point into their calculation.
That doesn't change my point about the link you posted claiming that Reform has no chance in Clacton. The data used to provide that prediction was gathered before Farage announced that he was running.
His announcement might result in an uptick in Reform's position in the opinion polls which might increase Reform's probability of winning that seat from zero, but I think it will also increase Labour's chance and decrease the Tories' chance.
-
What has he achieved?
He contributed largely to making Brexit an issue and then getting it through.
-
That doesn't change my point about the link you posted claiming that Reform has no chance in Clacton. The data used to provide that prediction was gathered before Farage announced that he was running.
His announcement might result in an uptick in Reform's position in the opinion polls which might increase Reform's probability of winning that seat from zero, but I think it will also increase Labour's chance and decrease the Tories' chance.
Except I didn't say that he had no chance, I specifically disagreed with that and highlighted that the reason EC shows no chance is the way they calculate it. And the reason I think Oddschecker overestimated it is because of the way they will be calculating it.
-
NS,
If you look for his monument, it's called Brexit.
Do people have monuments to achievements that are disastrous?
-
NS,
Do people have monuments to achievements that are disastrous?
That it's disastrous I might agree but it doesn't mean that others agree, and doesn't mean that Farage isn't one of the most effective and successful, in their own terms, politicians in the UK in the last 50 years.
-
"Growing backlash after Tory chair lands safe seat" - Low level corruption but corruption all the same.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckkkq4kx3l0o
-
Farage currently 14/1 to be next Tory leader.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/reform-uk-pulls-to-within-two-points-of-tories-in-latest-yougov-poll/ar-BB1nGHce
-
BBC a bit worried that the pause from some party leaders in campaigning as attending D Day commemorations might lead to a dull day in the election but 'not to worry' because there's still the crazy Greens, and Daft Ed Davey.
-
He contributed largely to making Brexit an issue and then getting it through.
I think his contribution to getting Brexit through was minor at best.
Cameron didn't call the referendum because of Farage but because of the anti-EU faction in his own party - a faction that has been a thorn in the side of the Conservative Party since at least the early 90's. I think Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings played a much bigger part in swinging the vote than Farage.
In this election, the Reform Party will almost certainly do nothing more than split the Tory vote even with Farage in charge.
-
I think his contribution to getting Brexit through was minor at best.
Cameron didn't call the referendum because of Farage but because of the anti-EU faction in his own party - a faction that has been a thorn in the side of the Conservative Party since at least the early 90's. I think Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings played a much bigger part in swinging the vote than Farage.
In this election, the Reform Party will almost certainly do nothing more than split the Tory vote even with Farage in charge.
And yet for tears Farage was the one clear voice on the subject because he could not being attached to the Tory Party, be monomaniacal about it, and sound not just Barkingside mad right wing. The part of the Tory Party that Cameron was trying to appease was emboldened by having the successes of UKIP, in particular in the 2014 EU elections, something that would not have happened without Farage.
The bulk of the support for Brexit had been built up over those years, long before Cumming and Johnson were heard of, at least not on the side of Brexit.
-
Three Jobs Ross decides not to give one up as he had said he would.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9xxe8xe59eo
-
..
-
Guardian poll tracker. Both Labour and Tories have gone up slightly in the last fortnight or so, while the others have gone down slightly. This may be within the margin of error, but if not, it might indicate strayers returning to one of the two main parties as the election approaches (only four weeks to go).
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2024/jun/03/uk-general-election-opinion-polls-tracker-latest-labour-tories-2024
-
And yet for tears Farage was the one clear voice on the subject because he could not being attached to the Tory Party,
So what?
The part of the Tory Party that Cameron was trying to appease was emboldened by having the successes of UKIP, in particular in the 2014 EU elections, something that would not have happened without Farage.
Don't agree. The anti-EU section has been around and causing trouble since John Major's time as PM.
By any objective measure, Farage's political career has been an abject failure. His only success was being on the winning side in the Brexit vote.
-
..
34 felony convictions
FTFY
-
So what?
Don't agree. The anti-EU section has been around and causing trouble since John Major's time as PM.
By any objective measure, Farage's political career has been an abject failure. His only success was being on the winning side in the Brexit vote.
The only reason there was a Brexit vote is Farage. Had he not been leading UKIP, it wouldn't have had tge promi ence as an issue. That there were some Tories that wanted a vote would have been irrelevant without the 2014 EU elections. You're allowing your dislike for him to affect your estimate of what he achieved.
-
The only reason there was a Brexit vote is Farage.
Nonsense
-
I was in position of struggling to find somewhere to carry my vote at the start of the election campaign because some parties were too keen to give up women's sex based spaces, and some were too Tory but I'm finding that they are making a real effort to give me more reasons not to vote.
Following on from the news that the Tories had picketed another 5m from Frank Hester, Seema Malhotra on Poltics Live was desperately keen to say evil stories bur wouldn't answer the questions about the dodgy donation altogether the Labour FM in Wales.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c900138vek4o
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001zz1p/politics-live-06062024
And, I'm pretty sure that had the donations from Hester been 50,000 rather than 10M, it would have been handed back.
-
Three Jobs Ross decides not to give one up as he had said he would.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9xxe8xe59eo
And in doing so got rid of sitting MP who had been sick but was just tossed out. What a sleekit wee prick Ross is.
-
"Ed Davey praised for posting 'deeply moving' video caring for disabled son" - not sure how I feel about this. Outside of a general election campaign, I think I'd be fine with it but something feels odd during the campaign
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/lib-dem-leader-ed-davey-32973983
-
In other news...
John Crace on form.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/06/theres-no-distance-these-conservative-heroes-wont-travel-to-serve-themselves
-
In another no doubt doomed attempt to get this thread back on track...
Aditya Chakrabortty on Fartage. (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/06/dont-underestimate-faragism-this-election-hes-a-virus-infecting-uk-politics)
-
In another no doubt doomed attempt to get this thread back on track...
Aditya Chakrabortty on Fartage. (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/06/dont-underestimate-faragism-this-election-hes-a-virus-infecting-uk-politics)
Good article.
Note given the upsurge in the 'trans' posting, and widening of it, the mods are discussing how best to keep the issue within the purview of the election, where it is relevant, and not make it just a thread about the issue.
-
Moderator Note we're going to separate put the 'trans' posts to a separate thread linked to the UK Election so that it can still be discussed with that as the context. While that's being done, the thread will be locked to make it feasible.
This has now been done the thread UK Election 2024 'trans' discussion is now available, and stickied for the rest of the election campaign, and this thread has been unlocked.
-
Sunak apologises for leaving D Day Commemorations early to record interview to say he hadn't lied in debate, though he had.
Just wow! Who advised him to do that? Starmer?
-
Deepfakes in the election. The Wes Streeting one discussed seems unlikely to move opinion. Perhaps Sunak should claim that the lying in the debate was a deep fake, and he actually attended all of the D Day Commemorations but was deep deepfaked out.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg33x9jm02ko
-
Sunak apologises for leaving D Day Commemorations early to record interview to say he hadn't lied in debate, though he had.
Just wow! Who advised him to do that? Starmer?
He snubbed the D-Day veterans to lie about lying - two (or possibly three) gaffes at once. Not bad going, even for the gaffemeister.
-
He snubbed the D-Day veterans to lie about lying - two (or possibly three) gaffes at once. Not bad going, even for the gaffemeister.
Bet it will be all over Farage's literature.
-
Bet it will be all over Farage's literature.
And I see the Labour line is that Sunak wants young people to do National Service but couldn't be bothered to stay at a service for veterans. Ooft.
-
My autocorrect keeps changing "Sunk" to "Sunk".
-
My autocorrect keeps changing "Sunk" to "Sunk".
Does it change "Rishi" to "Risky"?
-
Chris Mason on Sunak's absence.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4nnz0w41kvo
-
Slightly surprised that the Tories haven't yet (to my knowledge) played the race card, suggesting that criticism and mockery of Risky is due to prejudice against his Asian name and descent.
-
Slightly surprised that the Tories haven't yet (to my knowledge) played the race card, suggesting that criticism and mockery of Risky is due to prejudice against his Asian name and descent.
When you are scared of losing votes to Reform, it's a dodgy card.
-
"Advisors" :o
Sunak at the outsized podium in the rain was literally incredible. How inept is he? Makes me wonder if they're taking orders, not advice.
This isn't an original thought, but I can't remember where I heard it... The legislature should be selected at random from the qualifying citizenry, as with jury service. I'm vague on the details, but I expect I could come up with some (unless anyone has a killer argument why 650 random people wouldn't be an improvement on the shower we've got).
-
"Advisors" :o
Sunak at the outsized podium in the rain was literally incredible. How inept is he? Makes me wonder if they're taking orders, not advice.
This isn't an original thought, but I can't remember where I heard it... The legislature should be selected at random from the qualifying citizenry, as with jury service. I'm vague on the details, but I expect I could come up with some (unless anyone has a killer argument why 650 random people wouldn't be an improvement on the shower we've got).
Well, it's an idea. But while there may be people willing to put their lives, careers etc on hold to spend a couple of weeks on jury service, somewhere fairly local to them, I think you'd find it exceptionally difficult to find people prepared to effectively up sticks to London for 5 years to be part of a legislature selected on jury-style basis.
And, sure there are plenty of useless MPs. But I really don't like this 'they are all the same, all as bad as each other' narrative. There are plenty of really hard-working and exceptionally effective MPs - and that is across all parties. But there is a difference between the job of a constituency MP and that of a minister and the government.
-
This isn't an original thought, but I can't remember where I heard it... The legislature should be selected at random from the qualifying citizenry, as with jury service. I'm vague on the details, but I expect I could come up with some (unless anyone has a killer argument why 650 random people wouldn't be an improvement on the shower we've got).
George Monbiot, in the Guardian the other day, is probably where you heard it. It'll never happen, ad that's probably just as well.
-
Well, it's an idea. But while there may be people willing to put their lives, careers etc on hold to spend a couple of weeks on jury service, somewhere fairly local to them, I think you'd find it exceptionally difficult to find people prepared to effectively up sticks to London for 5 years to be part of a legislature selected on jury-style basis.
And, sure there are plenty of useless MPs. But I really don't like this 'they are all the same, all as bad as each other' narrative. There are plenty of really hard-working and exceptionally effective MPs - and that is across all parties. But there is a difference between the job of a constituency MP and that of a minister and the government.
There are many good MPs but much of what they do that is good isn't really seen. The gong show in the HoC seeks designed to make them look like idiots, though some make special contributions to that effect.
Those debates when the House rises to the occasion, infrequent, and are often after cock ups by numerous executives- see the debate on the Horizon fuck up.
Add to that the various expenses issues, the subsidised pubs and restaurants in the HoC, the huge unwieldy patronage of the HoL, and the system looks indulgent and decrepit.
I'll be interested in the turnout at the election, current betting is that it will be below 64%, and I suspect many voting will vote with little enthusiasm, and often purely against certain parties, rather than for anyone. And, of course, FPTP had its own issues there.
-
I've never been that bothered of general ministers didn't know the price of a pint of milk, but you would think if you were the Minister for Children talking about child benefit, you'd check on how much it was.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-childrens-minister-admits-doesnt-32980418
-
One for SteveH
From PoliticalBetting - "Con Hemel Hempstead candidate has quit (personal reasons). 35 minutes to find another candidate…"
Well that's now 11 minutes as nomination window closes at 4pm!
-
:o :D
You're right! I wonder who they'll parachute in to replace him.
-
:o :D
I'm presuming that CCHQ have another candidate lined up ... but then again I wouldn't bet on it, not as if they have a solid track record on competence over the past few weeks.
However - I'd image that if the good voters in Hemel can settle on the best 'get rid of the Tory' candidate then we won't have a tory MP there in a few weeks time.
-
Frantic Green vetting
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7228qnz555o
-
I'm presuming that CCHQ have another candidate lined up ... but then again I wouldn't bet on it, not as if they have a solid track record on competence over the past few weeks.
However - I'd image that if the good voters in Hemel can settle on the best 'get rid of the Tory' candidate then we won't have a tory MP there in a few weeks time.
I almost want it to be Boris Johnson.
-
Andrew Williams has been the leader of the Tory group on the local council for many years.
-
Unite refuse to endorse Labour manifesto. Not sure if that will have much of an effect.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c722zkj9ly8o
-
No Tory candidate in Rotherham - the Tory campaign omnishambles goes from disaster to disaster.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c877068x382o
-
Feline pissed off with the Tories?
-
No Tory candidate in Rotherham - the Tory campaign omnishambles goes from disaster to disaster.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c877068x382o
This could be Rotherham or anywhere
Liverpool or Hove
'Cause Rotherham is anywhere
Tories are alone
With apologies to Paul Heaton
-
John Curtice on the maleficent seven. He says he's surprised that Rayner and Morduant didn't respond to criticisms from the other parties but I suspect both were under instructions not to, and to make it look like there were only 2 parties that were important. If I were advising the other parties, apart from Reform, I would have said to ignore the Tories and Labour. The other parties would likely say all.yoi needed and if you were the only one just standing up for your vision and only that then you'd stand out.
Reform's shtick is to criticise so there's no point them doing it. Farage will be annoyed to be seen as just one of the others.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0vvxw4egnzo
-
.
-
.
-
Clearly a strategy from the Tories is to talk over Labour and scream £2000 at every opportunity. That Hussain didn't control it more firmly is a shame as I thought she had more about her than Etchingham.
Apparently, The Spectator, not known for being left leaning (this is from HIGNFY last night) used the same calculations that produced the £2000 figure on the Tories promises, and it works out at £3000.
-
.
-
One for SteveH
From PoliticalBetting - "Con Hemel Hempstead candidate has quit (personal reasons). 35 minutes to find another candidate…"
Well that's now 11 minutes as nomination window closes at 4pm!
A replacement was found.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp66yrj1x8zo.amp
-
A replacement was found.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp66yrj1x8zo.amp
Yup - Andrew Williams, leader of the Tory group on Dacorum Borough Council, and one of my two local councillors. The other one is Labour.
"Well, that was terribly dignified, wasn't it?" - Carla Denyer (Green), in last night's debate, after Angela and Penny had finished scratching each other's eyes out.
-
Yup - Andrew Williams, leader of the Tory group on Dacorum Borough Council, and one of my two local councillors. The other one is Labour.
"Well, that was terribly dignified, wasn't it?" - Carla Denyer (Green), in last night's debate, after Angela and Penny had finished scratching each other's eyes out.
I'm probably going to vote for Carla. My usual party (the Lib-Dems) don't seem to be interested in this seat.
-
I'm probably going to vote for Carla. My usual party (the Lib-Dems) don't seem to be interested in this seat.
I wonder if there is a tacit agreement between the two parties in your seat.
-
I wonder if there is a tacit agreement between the two parties in your seat.
May well be - this is basically the Green's number one target seat I think.
-
I wonder if there is a tacit agreement between the two parties in your seat.
May well be - this is basically the Green's number one target seat I think.
Yes. They have a very good chance of winning it and according to the polls and May's council elections, it is very much a two horse race between the Green Party and Labour.
I should say that the Tories are nowhere to be seen either, nor any other parties.
-
Yes. They have a very good chance of winning it and according to the polls and May's council elections, it is very much a two horse race between the Green Party and Labour.
I should say that the Tories are nowhere to be seen either, nor any other parties.
And given relatively restricted resources no point in the Lib Dems trying to make it a three horse race.
-
And given relatively restricted resources no point in the Lib Dems trying to make it a three horse race.
No point in the Tories trying to make any race one involving them, the way things are going.
-
No point in the Tories trying to make any race one involving them, the way things are going.
Yep, I think there will be quite a lot of money for the Tories being channelled into a relatively small.amount od seats, I.e. the winnable ones, and the ones with well known MPs for the Tories.
-
Well, it's an idea. But while there may be people willing to put their lives, careers etc on hold to spend a couple of weeks on jury service, somewhere fairly local to them, I think you'd find it exceptionally difficult to find people prepared to effectively up sticks to London for 5 years to be part of a legislature selected on jury-style basis.
And, sure there are plenty of useless MPs. But I really don't like this 'they are all the same, all as bad as each other' narrative. There are plenty of really hard-working and exceptionally effective MPs - and that is across all parties. But there is a difference between the job of a constituency MP and that of a minister and the government.
Yes. It would have to be a compulsory civic duty. And you would need a robust, independent judiciary and properly impartial civil service to go with it. It would mean no member of the legislature was a "career politician". Reduce the opportunities for corruption. Anyway, a pipe dream and seriously off-topic now, sorry.
-
ModeratorA couple of posts have been moved to the Election Trans thread, as they were closer to that thread's topic
-
'X takes action on deepfake network smearing UK politicians after BBC investigation'.
It's a huge worry but still I don't think it's affecting the opinion much.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq55gd8559eo
-
Kuenssberg on Sunak's shocking week
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz55kvkp0ymo
-
.
-
Why is the Hate-Mail, of all papers, exaggerating Labour's lead and suggesting that the Tories will end up well down in two figures, rather than suggesting that the Tories will make a big come-back by polling day, as you'd expect them to? Are they trying to scare their readers into sticking with the Tories rather than voting reform or not bothering to vote? Risky strategy, if so.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/tories-face-election-wipeout-with-labour-set-to-gain-a-416-majority/ar-BB1nS2No?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=bdc4d9b58568419e9d77387e8b691d1d&ei=7
-
Points to Shabana Mahmood on calling Farage out on his comment about Sunak, I think Mel Stride should have been just as clear.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx005vdgg5yo
-
First 'party leader' to say they are going to resign in the campaign
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ceddenl8xz4o
-
First 'party leader' to say they are going to resign in the campaign
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ceddenl8xz4o
Well that's refreshing: a Conservative politician resigning without having to be strong armed out.
-
Well that's refreshing: a Conservative politician resigning without having to be strong armed out.
I think the hints in the article are that he was told to since there looked to be a big chance that standing to be an MP when he said he wouldn't, on top of the shafting of Duguid, meant that they would lose the seat.
Though I'm not sure if your post was entirely serious.
-
Views of various Reform candidates:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjmmrwexv4ko
-
Views of various Reform candidates:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjmmrwexv4ko
Almost impressively they appear to be the views of a single candidate.
-
.
-
Record number of candidates
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3ggeng6kqxo
-
The parties position on climate policies. I have to admit to being surprised that the Tories haven't courted more possible Reform voters by going further than they have in dropping climate policies.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp335p7x315o
-
Record number of candidates
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3ggeng6kqxo
I've just, out of idle curiosity, tried to discover which constituency has the largest number of candidates standing, but neither Google nor Bing seemed to even understand the question, however I phrased it, though you'd think it was fairly straightforward, so I still don't know. Does anyone else?
-
I've just, out of idle curiosity, tried to discover which constituency has the largest number of candidates standing, but neither Google nor Bing seemed to even understand the question, however I phrased it, though you'd think it was fairly straightforward, so I still don't know. Does anyone else?
Richmond and Northallerton with 13
https://democracyclub.org.uk/blog/2024/06/08/2024-uk-general-election-candidate-summary/
-
I've just, out of idle curiosity, tried to discover which constituency has the largest number of candidates standing, but neither Google nor Bing seemed to even understand the question, however I phrased it, though you'd think it was fairly straightforward, so I still don't know. Does anyone else?
It's almost always the one where the current PM is standing.
Edit: And I wrote that before seeing
Richmond and Northallerton with 13
https://democracyclub.org.uk/blog/2024/06/08/2024-uk-general-election-candidate-summary/
-
On trying to find which constituency had the most candidates for Steve, I looked at a couple of things, and wiki had a section on former MPs standing, and I found Dave Nellist, blast from the past, is standing. I had thought he must be ancient but he's , in US Presidential terms, nobbut a lad of 71.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Nellist
-
Triggered by Steve's question, I'm currently looking for how many constituencies have either all female or all male candidate lists. In 2017 the constituency I was in, I haven't moved but the constituency has ceased to be, had the only all female list, and it was the first one since 1997. There were iirc 92 all male lists in the 2017 election.
-
I don't know if this has been posted before, but it's worth a look even if it has.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf397hCmnZ8
It's Richard Holden doing a pool interview. It's "the Thick of It" level.
-
Oddschecker now has Rochdale odds up. Labour odds on to win but still tight, see picture. If Galloway loses, and I really hope he does, he will set a new record for MPs losing their seat at one GE, winning a by election, and then losing that in the GE see second picture.
-
"Couple caught in deposit trap want election to unlock home-owning dream" - this is always an interesting one, as the article makes clear, for houses to be more affordable politicians would have to commit to house prices stagnating or falling, and they don't want to do that. Even the Greens, who aren't tied to the idea of increasing house prices,are caught by this because to do it would mean loads more houses and that goes against what they want in terms of development.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjrrqn0jvgro
-
Richmond and Northallerton with 13
https://democracyclub.org.uk/blog/2024/06/08/2024-uk-general-election-candidate-summary/
Thanks.
I've noticed that the neo-fascist far-right parties such as NF and BNP (as opposed to the hard right, such as reform, which is not overtly racist) seem to have disappeared from the electoral scene.
-
"Couple caught in deposit trap want election to unlock home-owning dream" - this is always an interesting one, as the article makes clear, for houses to be more affordable politicians would have to commit to house prices stagnating or falling, and they don't want to do that. Even the Greens, who aren't tied to the idea of increasing house prices,are caught by this because to do it would mean loads more houses and that goes against what they want in terms of development.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjrrqn0jvgro
Peter and Rebecca sounds like a middle-class, professional couple from Surrey, but in the photo they look more like Darren and Jayde.
-
Another eejit throwing stuff at Farage.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmjj1n030djo
-
Farage pulls out of interview after a colleague says we should have appeased Hitler:
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=aae5c091727c30f2JmltdHM9MTcxODA2NDAwMCZpZ3VpZD0yZTgyYzJjNi0wYWM3LTY5NDQtMDQ0ZS1kNjVkMGI1NzY4YTkmaW5zaWQ9NTUxMg&ptn=3&ver=2&hsh=3&fclid=2e82c2c6-0ac7-6944-044e-d65d0b5768a9&u=a1L25ld3Mvc2VhcmNoP3E9RmFyYWdlK1B1bGxzK091dCtPdmVyK0hpdGxlcitSb3cmZXZlbnRhbnM9MSZldmVudGxhbmQ9MCZldmVudHJlbD0wJnFwdnQ9RmFyYWdlK3B1bGxzK291dCtvdmVyK0hpdGxlcityb3cmRk9STT1FV1JF&ntb=1
-
So Sunak says he had to sacrifice lots of things growing up and when pushed all he could come up with was that he couldn't have Sky TV.
-
"Voter confidence at record low" - I'm utterly shocked.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv223kzq6r9o
-
Chris Mason on the Tory manifesto.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw00k66jd3ro
I have to admit that the fudge over the ECHR seems like an attempt to give away your cake and sticking your fingers down your throat as you don't eat it. The lazy lying of referring to it as 'foreign court' gives support to Reform's dangerous maunderings but in not saying they will withdraw cedes all action to Reform as well.
The lack of detail on social care 14 years after the Dilnot report, and after promises through 4 elections and 5 PMs, and after Johnson lying, inevitably, about his oven ready plans shows that they are incapable of dealing with the hard problems again.
-
So Sunak says he had to sacrifice lots of things growing up and when pushed all he could come up with was that he couldn't have Sky TV.
Oh the horror - I too could not have SKY TV as a child. It was such a sacrifice to miss out on things that didn't yet exist. I also remember having to watch B&W television when some of my classmates had a colour tv. The things we gave up eh? Give your head a fucking wobble Mr Sunak.
-
Oh the horror - I too could not have SKY TV as a child. It was such a sacrifice to miss out on things that didn't yet exist. I also remember having to watch B&W television when some of my classmates had a colour tv. The things we gave up eh? Give your head a fucking wobble Mr Sunak.
Begging for someone to meme a one of the pictures from when he ran away from the D Day Commemorations with him shaking a veteran's hand and saying. 'I understand sacrifice. Your friends gave up their lives, I gave up Sky TV'
-
The rain continues on Sunak's parade
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clmmvnpr8n8o
-
I welcome his desperation butI'd have an easier time accepting it's an issue if Shapps didn't support first past the post. The Tories were ecstatic about having getting a substantial majority from a minority of votes 5 years ago. To complain about what might happen now is hypocrisy.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/shapps-warns-voters-not-to-hand-labour-a-supermajority/ar-BB1o4oeA
-
So Sunak says he had to sacrifice lots of things growing up and when pushed all he could come up with was that he couldn't have Sky TV.
He really, really doesn't get it, does he.
This reminds me of the cringeworthy video from when he was about 20 and talking to kids in a London inner city school where he does the big reveal that he went to Winchester College (not that I imagine any of the kids would have had a clue what that was) and that they can be like him too. Err no they couldn't as there parents couldn't come close to affording the fees regardless of how many sacrifice they made.
He doesn't seem to realist that to make a decision to spend tens of thousands per year on school fees rather than on Sky or foreign holidays etc you need to have tens of thousands of disposable income per year in the first place. Most people don't so the notion of making a choice what to do with your tens of thousands of disposable income per year is completely moot.
-
And the inference that if you sacrifice your Sky subscription you can afford to send your kids to a top school is deeply, deeply disingenuous.
In the early 90s average boarding school fees were approx. £8000 (Winchester would, of course have been rather higher). A Sky subscription at the time was about a couple of hundred for installation and then about £10 per month. So even in the first year subscription would have been about £400 - so that 'saving' from sacrificing having Sky would have paid for about 1-2 weeks of school fees.
But of course for most people in the early 90s Sky was a luxury that they couldn't afford. Perhaps most of his Winchester chums had Sky in their family homes, but only about 1-2 million homes had Sky at that point. For most people Sky wasn't something they might sacrifice for their children's private school fees - nope it was something that they simply couldn't afford as their money was going on 'luxuries' such as food, mortgage costs, transport to get to work etc. No amount of sacrifice would allow them the disposable income to spend £8000 per year on private education (for each child).
-
Fuck me, but the actual interview is even worse than I imagined.
https://www.itv.com/news/2024-06-11/rishi-sunak-says-he-went-without-sky-tv-as-a-child
-
Fuck me, but the actual interview is even worse than I imagined.
https://www.itv.com/news/2024-06-11/rishi-sunak-says-he-went-without-sky-tv-as-a-child
FFS - the opening comment is him apologising that he was a bit late for his ITV interview because the 80th anniversary commemoration events 'ran over' - that's what you say about a standard meeting when you arrive late at your next meeting, not what you say about the last major commemoration while people who were there are still alive for one of the most important historical moments of the last century.
-
He really, really doesn't get it, does he.
This reminds me of the cringeworthy video from when he was about 20 and talking to kids in a London inner city school where he does the big reveal that he went to Winchester College (not that I imagine any of the kids would have had a clue what that was) and that they can be like him too. Err no they couldn't as there parents couldn't come close to affording the fees regardless of how many sacrifice they made.
He doesn't seem to realist that to make a decision to spend tens of thousands per year on school fees rather than on Sky or foreign holidays etc you need to have tens of thousands of disposable income per year in the first place. Most people don't so the notion of making a choice what to do with your tens of thousands of disposable income per year is completely moot.
Indeed. And didn't he ask a homeless person in a soup kitchen about where he worked (or similar)?
-
FFS - the opening comment is him apologising that he was a bit late for his ITV interview because the 80th anniversary commemoration events 'ran over' - that's what you say about a standard meeting when you arrive late at your next meeting, not what you say about the last major commemoration while people who were there are still alive for one of the most important historical moments of the last century.
As too often with politicians recently, I have the vague suspicion that they are actually a comedic actor who was pretending to be a sort of political Alan Partridge but got mistaken for the real thing.
-
Fuck me, but the actual interview is even worse than I imagined.
https://www.itv.com/news/2024-06-11/rishi-sunak-says-he-went-without-sky-tv-as-a-child
He has to be pushed and pushed about what he had to go without as a kid, which he evasively and vaguely before answers he finally answers 'Sky tv'. Note to Sunak - when people ask you about what you had to 'go without' they are talking about things that most people had/could afford, that you didn't - not things that most people didn't have/couldn't afford.
Starmer's equivalent was a home phone - that is 'going without' as when Starmer was growing up in the 1970s most people would have had a phone in their homes (even if like us it was a 'party line' phone).
-
As too often with politicians recently, I have the vague suspicion that they are actually a comedic actor who was pretending to be a sort of political Alan Partridge but got mistaken for the real thing.
I've heard the comment a few times about Sunak that he just isn't very good at politics.
-
I've heard the comment a few times about Sunak that he just isn't very good at politics.
Sunak is astonishingly rich and privileged and comes across as ... err ... astonishingly rich and privileged.
So I guess there is a refreshing honesty ;)
-
Greens to raise 70bn in taxes. Hmm.. with taxes on assets on a self declared tax forms. Either lying to look good or stupid.
-
Another eejit throwing stuff at Farage.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmjj1n030djo
On the subject of throwing stuff (from Newsthump):
I know we've said before, but it apparently bears repeating:
Throwing milkshakes at politicians is 100% wrong, and anyone doing it should be punished to the full extent of the law.
However, as long as the only thing physically harmed by a thrown milkshake is an ego and a jacket, it's also pretty funny.
These positions are not mutually exclusive.
Thank you for coming to our Ted Talk.
-
.
-
.
-
I'm beginning to suspect that the Tory strategy is to turn Sunak into a beloved hapless comic character like Mr Bean since that was part of Johnson's shtick.
-
.
-
..
-
..
Good evening, I'm from Essex Winchester College
In case you couldn't tell
My given name is Rishi
I don't have a TV dishy
And I'm doing very well very badly in the polls.
-
"Sunak’s close parliamentary aide faces probe after betting on July election date"
Apparently he should have thought about how it looked. Indeed he should have and not having done so makes it look as if he's dodgy as fuck.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/gambling-commission-jonathan-ashworth-conservative-montgomery-prime-minister-b2561510.html
-
"Sunak’s close parliamentary aide faces probe after betting on July election date"
Apparently he should have thought about how it looked. Indeed he should have and not having done so makes it look as if he's dodgy as fuck.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/gambling-commission-jonathan-ashworth-conservative-montgomery-prime-minister-b2561510.html
It looks like fraud.
Jesus Christ, these people are morons.
-
It looks like fraud.
Jesus Christ, these people are morons.
Maybe he was going to use it to get Sunak SKY TV
-
Sunak is astonishingly rich and privileged and comes across as ... err ... astonishingly rich and privileged.
So I guess there is a refreshing honesty ;)
True :)
-
It looks like fraud.
Jesus Christ, these people are morons.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c722eyxxknro
So it appears it was a £100 bet, 3 days before the election was called. I'm not sure what the odds were but I doubt much more than 5/1. It's not about the money, it's either just about feeling a wee bit superior for a tiny bit of corruption, or just an odd thing where he didn't think at all that it could be seen as dodgy were it to happen. He's either too corrupt or too stupid to be elected.
-
Sunak getting tetchy again on Sky.
-
Sunak getting tetchy again on Sky.
I've sacrificed having it
-
.
-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c722eyxxknro
So it appears it was a £100 bet, 3 days before the election was called. I'm not sure what the odds were but I doubt much more than 5/1.
The article says he could have won £500, so 5/1. I'm surprised the odds were so short given that everybody thought the autumn was most likely.
It's not about the money, it's either just about feeling a wee bit superior for a tiny bit of corruption, or just an odd thing where he didn't think at all that it could be seen as dodgy were it to happen. He's either too corrupt or too stupid to be elected.
If he knew the date when he placed the bet, he has broken the law.
-
In the run-up to the '97 election, I was pushing Labour leaflets through letter boxes one day, and in one street discovered that a Tory leafleter had been down the street before me, and had foolishly left all their leaflets sticking half out of the letterboxes, instead of pushing them all the way through. Naturally, I pulled them all out again before putting my leaflets through, and later threw them away. Very norty of me, of course, and probably even illegal, but who wouldn't've?
-
Very norty of me, of course, and probably even illegal, but who wouldn't've?
Somebody with some integrity?
Anyway, you would find it pretty tricky in our constituency. The Tories don't seem to be campaigning here at all.
-
Somebody with some integrity?
Anyway, you would find it pretty tricky in our constituency. The Tories don't seem to be campaigning here at all.
I think this time it would be more effective to push then through
-
The idea that Sunak knew about bad news on the horizon causing him to call the election early becomes even more worrying as figures come put during the election that are bad.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn448j3z7ggo
-
The Tories don't seem to be campaigning here at all.
Nor here. They must be concentrating their efforts on the most winnable constituencies. Hemel is on Labour's target list.
Voted Labour about an hour ago, by posting my postal vote, so no possibility of changing my mind now.
-
I think this time it would be more effective to push then through
I think their strategy in Bristol is "if we stay completely quiet, maybe we'll pick up som votes when people put their crosses in the wrong box".
-
The idea that Sunak knew about bad news on the horizon causing him to call the election early becomes even more worrying as figures come put during the election that are bad.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn448j3z7ggo
Either that or he thought he could get better odds than 5-1.
-
Either that or he thought he could get better odds than 5-1.
I hope the Gen. Pub. will realise that a new Labour government can't turn everything round immediately, and some things may even continue to get worse for a while. It's like stopping a giant container ship - they need about 3.5 nautical miles.
-
I hope the Gen. Pub. will realise that a new Labour government can't turn everything round immediately, and some things may even continue to get worse for a while. It's like stopping a giant container ship - they need about 3.5 nautical miles.
There's pretty much nothing in their manifesto that will.make much difference as opposed to the Tories.
-
I hope the Gen. Pub. will realise that a new Labour government can't turn everything round immediately, and some things may even continue to get worse for a while. It's like stopping a giant container ship - they need about 3.5 nautical miles.
I think that voters are pretty accepting that when a new government comes in that it will take time for changes to happen and to make a difference to people's lives.
So the 'look at the mess we inherited, give us the time to fix it' has a pretty strong resonance. In 1997 the voters gave Labour time to enact their changes and to show whether (or not) they worked. The same happened in 2010 for the Tories. So I don't expect anything significantly different this time around - no one (except the most partisan tory) is going to expect everything to resolve itself in a few months, particularly give what a mess the UK is in at the moment.
The key for Labour is to show that things are beginning to improve in time for the next election, which will then be fought on 'give us the opportunity to finish what we started'. You have to go back to the 70s for a point where a first term incumbent government wasn't 'given the opportunity to finish what they started'.
The other point is that the 'don't let them back in, look at the mess they made last time' has legs - the tories went on about the 1970s Labour governments for decades, likewise Labour on the Tories of the 80s, and even now (despite the evidence) the tories are still trotting out Liam Byrne's jokey - there is no money left. The ability Labour to focus on the mess and chaos of the 2010-2024 period is going to make those other messages look really, really mild in comparison.
-
The article says he could have won £500, so 5/1. I'm surprised the odds were so short given that everybody thought the autumn was most likely.
If he knew the date when he placed the bet, he has broken the law.
You are right, I just was struggling with the motivation. I'm intrigued how he got caught. It's a very small bet to be picked up. The odds wouldn't have been much higher for a number of reasons but a couple that such things are subject to inside knowledge, and it's a very small market. The Gambling Commission could have been watching it in case of something but I wonder if someone reported him. He talks about 'one of his accounts' so I presume he's made a few bets in his time. I wonder if he's done anything similar.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cneevz8278eo
-
There's pretty much nothing in their manifesto that will.make much difference as opposed to the Tories.
I think you are missing the key point of this election.
That the tories have said they would do all sorts of things (e.g. get the economy growing, stop the boats, get waiting lists falling etc etc) and failed to do any of them - indeed in many cases the stats show the situation to be the worst it has ever been.
So the argument is about competence - sure both labour and the tories claim they will reduce waiting lists, but they key is whether labour will actually succeed - the tories claims ring hollow as they've been in charge, and failed to do it so why would you expect them to be successful when their track record is one of failure.
And the most critical one here is economic growth - this has been woeful since 2010 compared to 1997-2010 (including the financial crash). And the most painless way o generate more tax revenue and more cash for public services is by growing the economy. Even Truss understood this (although the notion that you borrowed money to give tax cuts was nuts on stilts). If labour can get the economy growing and provide the stability that businesses need to make long term investment decisions (as they did post 1997) then that will unlock massive change compared to the past 14 years.
-
I think you are missing the key point of this election.
That the tories have said they would do all sorts of things (e.g. get the economy growing, stop the boats, get waiting lists falling etc etc) and failed to do any of them - indeed in many cases the stats show the situation to be the worst it has ever been.
So the argument is about competence - sure both labour and the tories claim they will reduce waiting lists, but they key is whether labour will actually succeed - the tories claims ring hollow as they've been in charge, and failed to do it so why would you expect them to be successful when their track record is one of failure.
And the most critical one here is economic growth - this has been woeful since 2010 compared to 1997-2010 (including the financial crash). And the most painless way o generate more tax revenue and more cash for public services is by growing the economy. Even Truss understood this (although the notion that you borrowed money to give tax cuts was nuts on stilts). If labour can get the economy growing and provide the stability that businesses need to make long term investment decisions (as they did post 1997) then that will unlock massive change compared to the past 14 years.
I entirely get the point of the election and none of your post addresses that the policies in terms of turning ship.of state around are pretty identical from both Tories and Labour.
Yes, there is the question of competence, and I have a known incompetence, against a guess. Even that known incompetence is questionable since Sunak is trying when not making laughable faux pa's to push the idea that through Covid, he was responsible for keeping the country afloat, and whether you agree or not, Labour didn't argue for substantial alternatives, and that he's repaired the Truss folly., just as Starmer might tout repairing the Corbyn one.
A lot of what happens to the economy, the govt is essentially a bystander for. The claim that the inflation rate has come down due to govt action when they aren't saying it went up because of them illustrates the problem.
I'd very tempted to vote, if I knew.who they were, for Napoleon's idea of lucky generals. The Tory Party is currently desperately making 500 quid on inside trading because they have lost their beliefs in their ability to spell lucky never mind actually be lucky.
The Tories need time in retreat to stab one and other, and work out what they are for again. That doesn't mean that Labour are guaranteed to do anything useful other not be Tories. I fear that dependent on the make up of the Tory MPs after the election they might embrace Farage as the Messiah rather than the very naughty boy
-
I entirely get the point of the election and none of your post addresses that the policies in terms of turning ship.of state around are pretty identical from both Tories and Labour.
But the point is whether you believe that the policies will actually be enacted and make a difference - that's the point.
Take the small boats - no-one is going to reasonably argue that we want more of them, now one is really going to argue that having any is OK. The point is whether there is a government in place that will actually change the situation. And on the one hand we have the tories who have totally failed - not just through their ludicrous, expensive and massively unethical policy, but also by failing to actually process the claims which would allow those people to be either deported (you cannot deport unless the claim has been resolved) or allowed to stay and contribute to the UK. Labour's policy is nothing like the tories - and that's before you get to whether you trust that labour will successfully implement their policy in a manner that the tories haven't.
Likewise NHS waiting lists - no-one is going to say we want them to stay at the levels they are or to increase. Everyone will commit to reducing them - the key is whether you believe that labour will do so (well they certainly did when last in power) vs the tories (who have inexorably raised them through 2010-2024, and indeed also did from 1979-1997).
-
But the point is whether you believe that the policies will actually be enacted and make a difference - that's the point.
Take the small boats - no-one is going to reasonably argue that we want more of them, now one is really going to argue that having any is OK. The point is whether there is a government in place that will actually change the situation. And on the one hand we have the tories who have totally failed - not just through their ludicrous, expensive and massively unethical policy, but also by failing to actually process the claims which would allow those people to be either deported (you cannot deport unless the claim has been resolved) or allowed to stay and contribute to the UK. Labour's policy is nothing like the tories - and that's before you get to whether you trust that labour will successfully implement their policy in a manner that the tories haven't.
Yes, I know. I covered that in terms of competence, but as noted we're just guessing about Labour's competence.
As to the actual policy, a very minor one in turning the ship as opposed to the boats around, the Labour policy on actually dealing with the boats seems to be to call the organisation doing it alsomething a bit tougher.
That neither Tory nor Labour will come up with even a flexible target for net migration makes me feel both parties are trying to appeal to voters with different aspirations in a typically piece of mendacious fudging.
-
....
Likewise NHS waiting lists - no-one is going to say we want them to stay at the levels they are or to increase. Everyone will commit to reducing them - the key is whether you believe that labour will do so (well they certainly did when last in power) vs the tories (who have inexorably raised them through 2010-2024, and indeed also did from 1979-1997).
I'd rather see a cohesive plan for health rather than promises about waiting lists but none of your added paragraph is relevant to my point unless you are claiming that the Labour Party is inherently a better managerial party .
You seem to be arguing against some strawman idea that I think the Tories should be voted for, or are in some way better than the Labour Party rather than the simple fact that in terms of policy on a macro economic level there is no real difference.
-
I'd rather see a cohesive plan for health rather than promises about waiting lists ...
Have you actually read their manifesto sections on health NS?
Because if not it is hardly reasonable to critique whether or not there is a coherent plan written in it.
-
Have you actually read their manifesto sections on health NS?
Because if not it is hardly reasonable to critique whether or not there is a coherent plan written in it.
Well I've read the ones published. I await the Labour but are you really saying that I should just ignore what has been said up till now because there's been a special secret plan all along? One that's been kept from the Labour Party in govt in Wales?
-
Well I've read the ones published. I await the Labour but are you really saying that I should just ignore what has been said up till now because there's been a special secret plan all along? One that's been kept from the Labour Party in govt in Wales?
So now read it, and it's a random set of targets and some motherhood and apple pie rhetoric. It doesn't loom at demand in the long term. It has no strategy. It doesn't question what the problems have been, and how to address them in anything other than a superficial manner, and it bears a remarkable resemblance to the Tory manifesto.
-
Well I've read the ones published. I await the Labour but are you really saying that I should just ignore what has been said up till now because there's been a special secret plan all along?
So you haven't read it then - yet you feel able to critique that there is no coherent plan.
Oh and by the way the manifesto was published this morning, so there is no excuse for you claiming that you weren't able to critique its coherence because it isn't available.
And the point about manifestos is that they put the meat on the bones so to speak - that's their purpose, to go beyond the crude headline and into the detail. Labour's is 133 pages long, so plenty of detail there should you wish to read it.
Come back to me once you have actually read the manifesto sections on health and then we can discuss whether it is coherent or not.
-
So now read it, and it's a random set of targets and some motherhood and apple pie rhetoric. It doesn't loom at demand in the long term. It has no strategy. It doesn't question what the problems have been, and how to address them in anything other than a superficial manner, and it bears a remarkable resemblance to the Tory manifesto.
Hmm - looks a lot like confirmation bias to me.
-
Hmm - looks a lot like confirmation bias to me.
Looks like you have no argument to put in disagreement to my points.
-
So now read it,
You are a fast reader then given that the time difference between your post where you hadn't read the manifesto and the one where you had was less than 6 minutes.
So I'm sure you can give me your views on:
The trial of Neighbourhood Health Centres
The proposals for a National Care Service
‘Opt-out’ smoking cessation interventions
Community Pharmacist Prescribing Service
Proposals for digitising the Red Book record
To name but a few of the proposals in the manifesto.
-
You are a fast reader then given that the time difference between your post where you hadn't read the manifesto and the one where you had was less than 6 minutes.
So I'm sure you can give me your views on:
The trial of Neighbourhood Health Centres
The proposals for a National Care Service
‘Opt-out’ smoking cessation interventions
Community Pharmacist Prescribing Service
Proposals for digitising the Red Book record
To name but a few of the proposals in the manifesto.
How about specialist referrals by professionals such as opticians - good idea or not NS?
-
You are a fast reader then given that the time difference between your post where you hadn't read the manifesto and the one where you had was less than 6 minutes.
So I'm sure you can give me your views on:
The trial of Neighbourhood Health Centres
The proposals for a National Care Service
‘Opt-out’ smoking cessation interventions
Community Pharmacist Prescribing Service
Proposals for digitising the Red Book record
To name but a few of the proposals in the manifesto.
Yes, I am a fast reader so what?
And stop being disingenuous, I don't have to gave a detailed opinion on every small proposal to see that it isn't a coherent strategy. Indeed that you've picked out small proposals show that it doesn't have a strategy.
And much of those, resemble the Tory Party approach as noted.
-
How about specialist referrals by professionals such as opticians - good idea or not NS?
You appear not to know what a strategy is.
-
You appear not to know what a strategy is.
Trust me - I know full well what a strategy is. I've spent many a time devising and then implementing them.
But you are a bit all over the place NS - initially you complained about no cohesive plan, but now you are talking about strategies. Perhaps you don't really understand the difference between an overarching strategy and the enabling plans that sit underneath it to ... err ... enable the strategic goals to be realised.
-
And stop being disingenuous, I don't have to gave a detailed opinion on every small proposal to see that it isn't a coherent strategy. Indeed that you've picked out small proposals show that it doesn't have a strategy.
But the very coherence is based on the small elements meshing together to achieve an overall goal. Otherwise you are either hand waving while crying 'let it be so' or create situations where the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.
A coherent plan or strategy (you seem rather confused about which of these you are talking about) requires an overall goal plus individual enabling elements which work coherently to achieve that goal.
Now I'm not necessarily arguing that the labour manifesto does that, but without assessment of the individual elements and their interconnectivity you cannot reasonably critique whether a plan or a strategy (which is it you are talking about NS) is coherent.
-
Trust me - I know full well what a strategy is. I've spent many a time devising and then implementing them.
But you are a bit all over the place NS - initially you complained about no cohesive plan, but now you are talking about strategies. Perhaps you don't really understand the difference between an overarching strategy and the enabling plans that sit underneath it to ... err ... enable the strategic goals to be realised.
Yes, and the manifesto doesn't present such a strategy. Rather a set of fire fighting tactical measures, which as noted bear a resemblance to the Tory manifesto.
-
But the very coherence is based on the small elements meshing together to achieve an overall goal. Otherwise you are either hand waving while crying 'let it be so' or create situations where the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing.
A coherent plan or strategy (you seem rather confused about which of these you are talking about) requires an overall goal plus individual enabling elements which work coherently to achieve that goal.
Now I'm not necessarily arguing that the labour manifesto does that, but without assessment of the individual elements and their interconnectivity you cannot reasonably critique whether a plan or a strategy (which is it you are talking about NS) is coherent.
In order to see whether individual elements add up to achieving the strategy, you need to know what the strategy is. The manifesto doesn't provide one.
-
In order to see whether individual elements add up to achieving the strategy, you need to know what the strategy is. The manifesto doesn't provide one.
Given that you don't really seem to understand the difference between a plan and a strategy I'm not sure you'd even know a strategy if it came up and hit you on the back of the head.
It is a overarching strategic goal - a bit like 'Build an NHS fit for the future, that is there when people need it; with fewer lives lost to the biggest killers; in a fairer Britain, where everyone lives well for longer.'
You will want some detailed and coherent enabling plans, of course, alongside to be able to meet that strategic goal,
-
Given that you don't really seem to understand the difference between a plan and a strategy I'm not sure you'd even know a strategy if it came up and hit you on the back of the head.
It is a overarching strategic goal - a bit like 'Build an NHS fit for the future, that is there when people need it; with fewer lives lost to the biggest killers; in a fairer Britain, where everyone lives well for longer.'
You will want some detailed and coherent enabling plans, of course, alongside to be able to meet that strategic goal,
And still the manifesto has no strategy
-
And still the manifesto has no strategy
What - not even the statement I quoted?
Note to NS - the best strategies are short, concise statements of purpose. The details go in the enabling plans that are required to achieve the strategy.
-
What - not even the statement I quoted?
Note to NS - the best strategies are short, concise statements of purpose. The details go in the enabling plans that are required to achieve the strategy.
Note to Prof D, that's a vision statement, which as so often with such things is motherhood and apple pie . There's nothing in the manifesto which amounts to a strategy.
-
Begging for someone to meme a one of the pictures from when he ran away from the D Day Commemorations with him shaking a veteran's hand and saying. 'I understand sacrifice. Your friends gave up their lives, I gave up Sky TV'
As predicted by NS:
-
As predicted by NS:
We're at the stage where there is not only no prospect of joined up thinking by Sunak and his advisors but that thinking has gone as well.
-
Note to Prof D, that's a vision statement, which as so often with such things is motherhood and apple pie . There's nothing in the manifesto which amounts to a strategy.
Glad to have you back after you've been madly searching in the 133 page document to find where the overarching strategic goals lie - note to NS, not in the individual chapters, but glad you've found it eventually.
They actually describe this as a 'mission', which is current corporate speech for an overarching strategic goal. As pointed out you need a range of enabling plans, which should be coherent one with another and consistent within the overall strategy. Those are set out in the individual chapter, although I'm making no comment on their coherence nor consistency.
On motherhood and apple pies - you seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that overarching strategic goals must be complex and opaque - they don't - they should be a clear and concise statement of the overall goals, with the enabling plans setting out how you will get there. The point is that if you lose sight of what your overall goals are - your mission or strategy - then you'll simply get bogged down in minutiae.
-
Just had a skim through parts of the Labour manifesto, mainly the NHS bit. Looks good. nothing any reasonable person could disagree with. Tried looking at the Tory one, but you have to download it - you can't read it directly - and I'm not polluting my download file with it.
-
Just had a skim through parts of the Labour manifesto, mainly the NHS bit. Looks good. nothing any reasonable person could disagree with.
I agree and there isn't a huge amount of difference to what the tories have written on paper. But this is where overall political instincts becomes important. So I have little doubt that Labour are committed to the NHS and if push came to shove they would prioritise funding the NHS over tax cuts. So when Labour talks of efficiencies it reads to me as doing more for the same funding. So the focus in on better outcomes.
The tories politically aren't committed so if push comes to shove they would prioritise tax cuts over more funding, or even the same funding, for the NHS. So when Labour talks of efficiencies it reads to me as doing the same for less funding, which often morphs into simply doing less. That's what we've seen over the past 14 years. So the focus is on cost cutting.
And there is also the issue of competence - why would we trust the tories to do something in the next 5 years that they've failed to do over the past 14 in government.
Tried looking at the Tory one, but you have to download it - you can't read it directly - and I'm not polluting my download file with it.
Tory manifesto is here:
https://public.conservatives.com/static/documents/GE2024/Conservative-Manifesto-GE2024.pdf
-
ITory manifesto is here:
https://public.conservatives.com/static/documents/GE2024/Conservative-Manifesto-GE2024.pdf
Thanks.
-
"Starmer: Reassurance with just a hint of paranoia" - the article softens the paranoia claim, rather it's about caring what the image looks like. There's something to be said for a less controlled approach but then there's the attitude in Sunak's campaign where the lack of care is half fuck you, I'm looking for the next job, and can I bet on the date of the election.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxee3j31p1no
-
I agree and there isn't a huge amount of difference to what the tories have written on paper. But this is where overall political instincts becomes important. So I have little doubt that Labour are committed to the NHS and if push came to shove they would prioritise funding the NHS over tax cuts. So when Labour talks of efficiencies it reads to me as doing more for the same funding. So the focus in on better outcomes.
The tories politically aren't committed so if push comes to shove they would prioritise tax cuts over more funding, or even the same funding, for the NHS. So when Labour talks of efficiencies it reads to me as doing the same for less funding, which often morphs into simply doing less. That's what we've seen over the past 14 years. So the focus is on cost cutting.
And there is also the issue of competence - why would we trust the tories to do something in the next 5 years that they've failed to do over the past 14 in government.
Tory manifesto is here:
https://public.conservatives.com/static/documents/GE2024/Conservative-Manifesto-GE2024.pdf
https://youtu.be/6Cs3Pvmmv0E?si=Qdx0AbT7MZds4TsB
-
"Starmer: Reassurance with just a hint of paranoia" - the article softens the paranoia claim, rather it's about caring what the image looks like. There's something to be said for a less controlled approach but then there's the attitude in Sunak's campaign where the lack of care is half fuck you, I'm looking for the next job, and can I bet on the date of the election.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxee3j31p1no
The photo at the head of the article looks horribly staged, like a still from some third-rate, cheesy musical - 'Jesus Christ! Superstarmer!', maybe.
-
The photo at the head of the article looks horribly staged, like a still from some third-rate, cheesy musical - 'Jesus Christ! Superstarmer!', maybe.
There's a Starmer
He's talking now on Sky
-
Current favourite at 6/4 for Tory seats on Oddschecker is 50 - 99
-
We could end up with a Labour government and a Lib Dem opposition!
-
Current odds on next Tory leader
-
We could end up with a Labour government and a Lib Dem opposition!
Possible but the betting still against that. Though that it's even a thing is weird
-
Current odds on next Tory leader
The complexity here is whether the various candidates retain their seats at the general election. If they lose then they cannot stand for the leadership. In a number of cases the current polling suggests winning/losing is on a knife edge.
-
I'm looking forward to a good few 'Portillo moments' - the schadenfreude could be overwhelming!
-
I'm looking forward to a good few 'Portillo moments' - the schadenfreude could be overwhelming!
The number of Tories standing down has removed a few hoped for Portillo moments.
-
John Curtice on the Farage effect, also interesting on Lib Dems advances
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd11jpqgzp4o
-
Jonathan Pie on Nigel Farage. Spot on as ever:
https://youtu.be/LwIa70EDZjE?si=8lhRfdarFAPlEI_p
-
Jonathan Pie on Nigel Farage. Spot on as ever:
https://youtu.be/LwIa70EDZjE?si=8lhRfdarFAPlEI_p
Good as usual, but he wants to be careful: I think the accusation that Fartage was associated with the NF in his youth has been disproved, or at any rate is "not proven", as they say in Scotland.
-
Current odds on next Tory leader
What a bunch!
-
If Sunak has given up any thought of even getting a decent size opposition, and is worried about Reform making the Tories a rump party then I think he should turn all his attention to destroying Farage. I don't give him a lot of hope but it would be an honourable way to go.
-
The complexity here is whether the various candidates retain their seats at the general election. If they lose then they cannot stand for the leadership. In a number of cases the current polling suggests winning/losing is on a knife edge.
Jeremy Hunt is 70/1 in part because of his ten and half thousand majority is seen as completely gone.
ETA - Michael Gove is 66/1 and he's not standing
-
Jeremy Hunt is 70/1 in part because of his ten and half thousand majority is seen as completely gone.
ETA - Michael Gove is 66/1 and he's not standing
Hunt isn't even the favourite Jeremy that's Jeremy Quin
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Quin
-
Always remember
-
And still the manifesto has no strategy
Which manifesto are you reading? The Labour manifesto I just looked at definitely has a strategy for the NHS.
-
This has just been published to recommend what those looking to vote tactically should do in order to damage the Tories - you can check each constituency for a recommendation.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/journalist_toolkit_getvoting
This is my own constituency (previously East Dunbartonshire in the 2019 GE) and currently held by the SNP, won by a narrow margin in 2019 (getting rid of Jo Swinson, the then leader of the Lib Dems). The advice given is to vote Lib Dem based on current polling, but I suspect it doesn't really matter since the Tories have little chance here anyway - it will most likely be a SNP vs Lib Dem contest.
https://www.getvoting.org/constituency/S14000097
-
Which manifesto are you reading? The Labour manifesto I just looked at definitely has a strategy for the NHS.
Absolutely - the Labour manifesto definitely has a strategy on the NHS.
But then we are discussing this with NS - who declared that Labour had no strategy (or rather no cohesive plan) when he hadn't even read the manifesto because he hadn't even realised that the manifesto had been published. When I pointed it out that it had been published 6 minutes after his initial post he claims to have read the manifesto (it is 133 pages long) and declared it had no strategy!
-
This has just been published to recommend what those looking to vote tactically should do in order to damage the Tories - you can check each constituency for a recommendation.
https://www.bestforbritain.org/journalist_toolkit_getvoting
This is my own constituency (previously East Dunbartonshire in the 2019 GE) and currently held by the SNP, won by a narrow margin in 2019 (getting rid of Jo Swinson, the then leader of the Lib Dems). The advice given is to vote Lib Dem based on current polling, but I suspect it doesn't really matter since the Tories have little chance here anyway - it will most likely be a SNP vs Lib Dem contest.
https://www.getvoting.org/constituency/S14000097
Although your page shows the Lib Dems ahead with Labour and the SNP more or less neck and neck in second and third. You could get a Labour MP if all the SNP voters switched to Labour (or an SNP MP if all the Labour voters switched) so your vote could matter.
I'd quite like it if the Conservatives got an absolute kicking but Labour didn't get an overall majority. I think that's the best chance of getting some voting reforms.
-
I'd quite like it if the Conservatives got an absolute kicking but Labour didn't get an overall majority. I think that's the best chance of getting some voting reforms.
I think the chances of that happening are very, very slim.
But on electoral reform - I'm not convinced that a hung parliament necessarily increases its likelihood. It certainly didn't work in 2010 when the LibDems insisted on a referendum, but the tories campaigned for no-change and AV was soundly beaten. One of the problems with having a vote on electoral reform under those circumstances is that it give the easy 'anti' argument of - 'look with electoral reform you'll get small parties with precious little popular support calling the shots'.
Weirdly I think potentially the best chance in this election for electoral reform would be (as some polls are suggesting) for Labour to get about 40% of the vote but roughly 500 seats. I think this might just be a general wake-up call that FPTP risks (and actually) delivers perverse electoral outcomes. There could be a groundswell clamour for change were this to actually happen. And ultimately there will only be change if a winning party accepts that the system that allowed them to win is wrong - i.e. acting on principle rather than self-interest.
-
Weirdly I think potentially the best chance in this election for electoral reform would be (as some polls are suggesting) for Labour to get about 40% of the vote but roughly 500 seats. I think this might just be a general wake-up call that FPTP risks (and actually) delivers perverse electoral outcomes. There could be a groundswell clamour for change were this to actually happen. And ultimately there will only be change if a winning party accepts that the system that allowed them to win is wrong - i.e. acting on principle rather than self-interest.
You mean, if the result is a blatant "travesty" of the popular vote. I think you may have a point. I do remember there was an election (2015?) where the SNP got about 50 seats and UKIP got about one but with a higher share of the vote.
I don't, by the way, think that the argument of "smaller party calling the shots" has any real merit. The Lib Dems had some influence between 2010 and 2015 but not the gun to the head sort of influence evoked by the argument (as witnessed by their failure to get any electoral reform). Also, the "coalition" between May's government and the DUP was not unduly influenced by the DUP, although, for the most part the Tories could manage without them.
-
You mean, if the result is a blatant "travesty" of the popular vote. I think you may have a point. I do remember there was an election (2015?) where the SNP got about 50 seats and UKIP got about one but with a higher share of the vote.
And this election could plausible produce this kind of non-sense on stilts.
So the latest polling from Redfield & Wilton, published 30 mins ago has the following headline voting intention:
Labour 43% (+1)
Reform UK 18% (+1)
Conservative 18% (–)
Lib Dem 12% (-1)
Green 5% (–)
SNP 3% (–)
Other 1% (–)
Put into a seat predictor (and without tactical voting) you get:
Lab 512
LD 57
Con 31
SNP 21
Ref 4
PC 4
Green 2
Others 19
So the party that:
Gets 43% of the vote ends up with 80% of the seats
The party that is equal second in popular vote gets 4 seats (equal 5th in parliamentary seat terms)
The official opposition is the party that comes 4th in the popular vote
And a party that gets just 3% of the vote ends up with 21 seats
-
....
Others 19
So the party that:
Gets 43% of the vote ends up with 80% of the seats
The party that is equal second in popular vote gets 4 seats (equal 5th in parliamentary seat terms)
The official opposition is the party that comes 4th in the popular vote
And a party that gets just 3% of the vote ends up with 21 seats
I suspect that the others is likely to have 8 DUP seats and 7 Sinn Fein seats, or vice versa, so joint 7th in parliamentary seat terms.
Other than that agree.
-
It is a shit system. A minority share of the vote producing a majority of seats in the HoC. Profoundly undemocratic
-
It is a shit system. A minority share of the vote producing a majority of seats in the HoC. Profoundly undemocratic
And the monstrosity that is the HoL
-
The sheep, they do not know him
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/rishi-sunak-david-cameron-try-33056919
-
'Labour suspends candidate over 'pro-Russian' post' - as social media offences go, this one seems not that offensive. Still adds to the drama in the seat.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0vvjzw5ejno
-
'Labour suspends candidate over 'pro-Russian' post' - as social media offences go, this one seems not that offensive. Still adds to the drama in the seat.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0vvjzw5ejno
Meanwhile in Reform.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx77lvd6e73o
Tbh, some of these are a bit so what.
-
Tbh, some of these are a bit so what.
Yeah, I'm think Meh. In fact, the Labour one above is also weak sauce.
What is funny though is that Reform UK has apparently squandered £144,000 to vet its candidates. Although, if they have 600 candidates, it's not very much for each one.
-
Yeah, I'm think Meh. In fact, the Labour one above is also weak sauce.
What is funny though is that Reform UK has apparently squandered £144,000 to vet its candidates. Although, if they have 600 candidates, it's not very much for each one.
Yeah , 220 quid a candidate seems a bit likely to perhaps miss stuff put but with these ones, I think you could easily have read it and said fine, might not be exactly mainstream but not a major problem
-
Damning verdict on the Tories.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jun/19/uk-general-election-2024-live-updates-latest-today-rishi-sunak-tories-labour-reform-ipsos-poll
Tory government from 2010 to 2024 worse than any other in postwar history, says study by leading experts
As John Stevens reports in a story for the Daily Mirror today, Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, was complaining at a private Tory dinner earlier this year about the electorate’s “total failure to appreciate our superb record since 2010”.
But just how good is the Conservative party’s record in government over the past 14 years? Thankfully, we now have what is as close as we’re going to get to the authoritative, official verdict. Sir Anthony Seldon, arguably Britain’s leading contemporary political historian, is publishing a collection of essays written by prominent academics and other experts and they have analysed the record of the Conservative government from 2010 to 2024, looking at what it has achieved in every area of policy.
It is called The Conservative Effect 2010-2014: 14 Wasted Years? and it is published by Cambridge University Press.
And its conclusion is damning. It describes this as the worst government in postwar history.
Here is the conclusion of the final chapter, written by Seldon and his co-editor Tom Egerton, which sums up the overall verdict.
In comparison to the earlier four periods of one-party dominance post-1945, it is hard to see the years since 2010 as anything but disappointing. By 2024, Britain’s standing in the world was lower, the union was less strong, the country less equal, the population less well protected, growth more sluggish with the outlook poor, public services underperforming and largely unreformed, while respect for the institutions of the British state, including the civil service, judiciary and the police, was lower, as it was for external bodies, including the universities and the BBC, repeatedly attacked not least by government, ministers and right-wing commentators.
Do the unusually high number of external shocks to some extent let the governments off the hook? One above all – Brexit – was entirely of its own making and will be seen in history as the defining decision of these years. In 2024, the verdict on Brexit is almost entirely negative, with those who are suffering the most from it, as sceptics at the time predicted, the most vulnerable. The nation was certainly difficult to rule in these fourteen years, the Conservative party still more so. Longstanding problems certainly contributed to the difficulties the prime minister faced in providing clear strategic policy, including the 24-hour news cycle, the rise of social media and AI, and the frequency of scandals and crises. But it was the decision of the prime minister to choose to be distracted by the short term, rather than focusing on the strategic and the long term. The prime minister has agency: the incumbents often overlooked it.
Overall, it is hard to find a comparable period in history of the Conservatives which achieved so little, or which left the country at its conclusion in a more troubling state.
In their concluding essay, Seldon and Egerton argue that poor leadership was one of the main problems with the 14-year administration. They say that Boris Johnson and Liz Truss were “not up to the job” of being prime minister, and they have a low opinion of most of the other leading figures who have been in government. They say:
Very few cabinet ministers from 2010 to 2024 could hold a candle to the team who served under Clement Attlee – which included Ernest Bevin, Nye Bevan, Stafford Cripps, Hugh Gaitskell and Herbert Morrison. Or the teams who served under Wilson, Thatcher or Blair. Michael Gove, Jeremy Hunt and Philip Hammond were rare examples of ministers of quality after 2010 …
A strong and capable prime minister is essential to governmental success in the British system. The earlier four periods saw two historic and landmark prime ministers, ie Churchill and Thatcher, with a succession of others who were capable if not agenda-changing PMs, including Macmillan, Wilson, Major and Blair. Since 2010, only Cameron came close to that level, with Sunak the best of the rest. Policy virtually stopped under May as Brexit consumed almost all the machine’s time, while serious policymaking ground to a halt under Johnson’s inept leadership, the worst in modern premiership, and the hapless Truss. Continuity of policy was not helped by each incoming prime minister despising their predecessor, with Truss’s admiration for Johnson the only exception. Thus they took next no time to understand what it was their predecessors were trying to do, and how to build on it rather than destroy it.
Seldon’s first book, published 40 years ago, was about Churchill’s postwar administration, and he has been editing similar collections of essays studying the record of administrations since Margaret Thatcher’s. He is a fair judge, and not given to making criticisms like this lightly.
The book is officially being published next week, and I’m quoting from a proof copy. In this version, the subtitle still has a question mark after 14 Wasted Years? Judging by the conclusion, that does not seem necessary.
-
Damning verdict on the Tories.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/jun/19/uk-general-election-2024-live-updates-latest-today-rishi-sunak-tories-labour-reform-ipsos-poll
I don't disagree but do wonder if there is a general decline rather than one specific to the Tories.
-
'Sunak protection officer arrested over alleged election date bets' - farcical
-
Well here is a poll for you - from this evening
Labour 35%
Reform UK 24%
Conservative 15%
Lib Dem 12%
Green 8%
SNP 3%
Stick that into Electoral Calculus and you get:
Lab 443
LD 64
Con 45
SNP 21
Ref 51
PC 4
Green 2
So LibDem official opposition and Tories 4th in terms of seats!!
-
Whose poll is that?
-
Whose poll is that?
PeoplePolling
-
Well here is a poll for you - from this evening
Labour 35%
Reform UK 24%
Conservative 15%
Lib Dem 12%
Green 8%
SNP 3%
Stick that into Electoral Calculus and you get:
Lab 443
LD 64
Con 45
SNP 21
Ref 51
PC 4
Green 2
So LibDem official opposition and Tories 4th in terms of seats!!
Probably a rogue poll - they do happen - but a chap can dream...
-
PeoplePolling
Ah, Matthew Goodwin's company. He's known for his right wing views and not sure I'd believe his results. Probably an outlier.
-
Probably a rogue poll - they do happen - but a chap can dream...
Bit of a nightmare having Reform do that well.
-
Tom Tugendhat moving up in the odds of next Tory Leader.
As an outside bet, I might bung a tenner on Mel Stride. At 150/1.
-
I don't disagree but do wonder if there is a general decline rather than one specific to the Tories.
I don't think you need to wonder: Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn were pretty bad and their teams equally so. I'm reserving judgement on Keri Starmer - I think he represents an improving trend, but he and his team don't inspire me much.
-
Bit of a nightmare having Reform do that well.
It was only one poll. Here's another single poll that predicts they will get no seats.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgrrlj4m5y3o
Also, the Tories will be almost completely wiped out.
-
It was only one poll. Here's another single poll that predicts they will get no seats.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgrrlj4m5y3o
Also, the Tories will be almost completely wiped out.
My comment was addressed to Steve's idea that it was a dream.
-
I don't think you need to wonder: Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn were pretty bad and their teams equally so. I'm reserving judgement on Keri Starmer = I think he represents an improving trend, but he and his team don't inspire me much.
And the devolved govts aren't a great inspiration either.
-
And the devolved govts aren't a great inspiration either.
That's not surprising to me. If you are a politician of any substance, you are probably looking to be part of the UK government, or at least the UK parliament, the exceptions being those who advocate independence for their region, but independence parties are single issue parties and they have their own problems.
-
That's not surprising to me. If you are a politician of any substance, you are probably looking to be part of the UK government, or at least the UK parliament, the exceptions being those who advocate independence for their region, but independence parties are single issue parties and they have their own problems.
Agreed, it's more the question of the performance of other parties in comparison to the Tories that in terms of govt for the 14 wasted years in the article.
-
That's not surprising to me. If you are a politician of any substance, you are probably looking to be part of the UK government, or at least the UK parliament, the exceptions being those who advocate independence for their region, but independence parties are single issue parties and they have their own problems.
Not really sure that is true - and let's not forget that the process of devolution isn't just about the parliament/assemblies in Scotland, Wales and NI, but also about the devolved mayoral roles in various places. Let's not forget that the electorate for the London mayoral election is roughly the size of the electorates for Scotland, Wales and NI combined ... and the mayor has a personal mandate - indeed by far the largest person vote of any politician in the UK.
So I am certainly not convinced that politicians see being a back bench MP, or even a junior minister (which would require your party being in power in Westminster) as being preferable/more important as being FM in Scotland, or indeed London mayor or Manchester Metro mayor. Certainly not much evidence of Andy Burnham (for example) looking for a route back into Westminster, even through he would likely end up in a senior ministerial post - he seems to prefer making a difference to Manchester.
-
Agreed, it's more the question of the performance of other parties in comparison to the Tories that in terms of govt for the 14 wasted years in the article.
I agree. I think there is no doubt that a Labour party with anything like the quality of the past in it would not have lost the 2017 election (actually it wouldn't have happened because the opinion polls would have been unfavourable to the Tories) and it probably would not have lost an election in 2019 or 2020.
The 2015 election might have gone differently too.
-
I agree. I think there is no doubt that a Labour party with anything like the quality of the past in it would not have lost the 2017 election (actually it wouldn't have happened because the opinion polls would have been unfavourable to the Tories) and it probably would not have lost an election in 2019 or 2020.
The 2015 election might have gone differently too.
I think a lot of this is about who is selected as a leader in opposition (and in recent years in government) - and all parties (but most notably Labour and the Tories who are the only ones with a chance to form a government) have been terrible at this. Routinely picking a leader who the narrow demographic of members and activists like for idealogical reasons, rather than someone who is likely to resonate with the wider electorate (which is necessary to win an election) and is respected by the people who actually work with them, MPs (which speaks to their basic competence).
I know they pay their membership fees, but realistically party members are absolutely the worst people to decide on a leader who is competent (that needs the people who actual know and work with them to determine) or likely to attract a wider electoral support.
-
Not really sure that is true - and let's not forget that the process of devolution isn't just about the parliament/assemblies in Scotland, Wales and NI, but also about the devolved mayoral roles in various places. Let's not forget that the electorate for the London mayoral election is roughly the size of the electorates for Scotland, Wales and NI combined ... and the mayor has a personal mandate - indeed by far the largest person vote of any politician in the UK.
So I am certainly not convinced that politicians see being a back bench MP, or even a junior minister (which would require your party being in power in Westminster) as being preferable/more important as being FM in Scotland, or indeed London mayor or Manchester Metro mayor. Certainly not much evidence of Andy Burnham (for example) looking for a route back into Westminster, even through he would likely end up in a senior ministerial post - he seems to prefer making a difference to Manchester.
You are not comparing like with like. If you are a prospective national party candidate for election would you rather be a back bench MP in Westminster with a chance of joining the UK government or would you rather be a Welsh assembly member, or a Scottish MSP with a chance of joining the devolved government? I suggest the former is the case.
I don't remember the metropolitan mayors in England being part of the discussion, so I don't know why you think they are relevant.
-
'Muslim millionaire gives major donation to Reform UK' - hmmm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd11xxn833yo
ETA - I think they obviously need the money, and it's good news on thar. Ir's a good piece of propaganda to say they aren't racist. Just wondering how it will play to the racists that are in the party.
-
I think a lot of this is about who is selected as a leader in opposition (and in recent years in government) - and all parties (but most notably Labour and the Tories who are the only ones with a chance to form a government) have been terrible at this. Routinely picking a leader who the narrow demographic of members and activists like for idealogical reasons, rather than someone who is likely to resonate with the wider electorate (which is necessary to win an election) and is respected by the people who actually work with them, MPs (which speaks to their basic competence).
I know they pay their membership fees, but realistically party members are absolutely the worst people to decide on a leader who is competent (that needs the people who actual know and work with them to determine) or likely to attract a wider electoral support.
I agree with all of this but I would add that many of the best people in the party would have been associated with the previous leadership and hence their failure and so are not really available to be selected as the new leader or are handicapped by their association. I think we saw this in 2010 when the wrong Miliband brother was selected and I think we saw that in 2015 when anybody associated with Ed Miliband was hamstrung by his failure.
-
You are not comparing like with like. If you are a prospective national party candidate for election would you rather be a back bench MP in Westminster with a chance of joining the UK government or would you rather be a Welsh assembly member, or a Scottish MSP with a chance of joining the devolved government? I suggest the former is the case.
But this isn't a small fish/small pond vs small fish/big pond argument - it is big fish/small pond vs small fish/big pond. The point being that there are people who feel they can get to the top in the smaller field in a devolved assembly, who simply wouldn't have any chance in a Westminster context. And for those people the devolved assemblies are more attractive.
I don't remember the metropolitan mayors in England being part of the discussion, so I don't know why you think they are relevant.
But they should be - devolution isn't just about the non-English nations. It isn't now and it never was - devolution to London via the mayor and GLA came hot on the heals of the parliament/assemblies in NI/Scotland/Wales.
Devolution is about devolving power from the UK national government to legislative bodies more locally throughout the UK. In some cases the geography of that devolution aligns with one of the constituent nations of the UK (Scotland/Wales/NI) in other cases it involved regional devolution in England (London/Manchester/West Midlands etc) - both are part of the same overall devolved approach.
-
I agree with all of this but I would add that many of the best people in the party would have been associated with the previous leadership and hence their failure and so are not really available to be selected as the new leader or are handicapped by their association. I think we saw this in 2010 when the wrong Miliband brother was selected and I think we saw that in 2015 when anybody associated with Ed Miliband was hamstrung by his failure.
Possibly true but you then get into the 'clean slate' vs 'no experience' argument - so someone who is completely untainted by being a minister in the dying days of a failing government may be criticised for not having any actual government experience if they become leader of the opposition. But of course when parties are out of power for an awfully long time you end up burning through all the ex-ministers as potential leaders and often end up with a leader who wins power back having never been a minister themselves.
So from 1979 Labour burned through ex ministers Foot and Smith (Kinnock was never a minister) before ending up with a winner, Blair who had no ministerial experience.
Likewise the Tories - Hague and Howard - both former ministers (IDS was never a minister) before ending up with a winner, Cameron who had no ministerial experience.
Looks like we will have a similar situation now - Miliband was a minister, Corbyn never was and Starmer also has no ministerial experience.
Just a little note on Corbyn - by 2015 he'd been an MP since 1983 (so through periods where Labour was in opposition, then in power, then in opposition) - in all that time no-one thought he had the abilities to be offered any ministerial or shadow ministerial position (even the most junior) - nor even chair of a select committee. Speaks volumes about how his colleagues saw his competence!
-
'Tory campaign official looked into over alleged election bet' and not just any official, the director of campaigning, and his wife is a candidate.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c722014r42xo
-
Mystic Camilla from 31 May
-
But this isn't a small fish/small pond vs small fish/big pond argument - it is big fish/small pond vs small fish/big pond. The point being that there are people who feel they can get to the top in the smaller field in a devolved assembly, who simply wouldn't have any chance in a Westminster context.
That is absolutely making my point for me. Thank you.
-
'Tory campaign official looked into over alleged election bet' and not just any official, the director of campaigning, and his wife is a candidate.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c722014r42xo
I'm sorry but I'm losing track of all this. Is this the original person? Or another new one?
-
I'm sorry but I'm losing track of all this. Is this the original person? Or another new one?
It's another one. Craig Williams, candidate for Montgomeryshire was the first. Then there was the policeman who was part of Sunak's security, now the director of campaigning Tony Lee, and also his wife, Laura Saunders, candidate for Bristol North West.
Needs a spreadsheet.
-
"Vote for me, or another grouse gets it!"
-
It's another one. Craig Williams, candidate for Montgomeryshire was the first. Then there was the policeman who was part of Sunak's security, now the director of campaigning Tony Lee, and also his wife, Laura Saunders, candidate for Bristol North West.
Needs a spreadsheet.
Sinak's 'incredible anger' not extending to suspending candidates while the investigations are carried out does seem more about trying to manage the publicity rather than doing anything. Williams has admitted placing the bet.
-
Sinak's 'incredible anger' not extending to suspending candidates while the investigations are carried out does seem more about trying to manage the publicity rather than doing anything. Williams has admitted placing the bet.
Yes hollow words indeed when not backed up by action.
That said - there is a problematic issue at this stage in the campaign with 'suspending candidates', as you cannot actually do it. Ballot papers have been printed and cannot be changed at this stage so a 'suspended candidate' will be on the ballot paper regardless of any suspension and will be on the ballot paper under the name of the party in question. And postal votes have gone out and plenty will already have been posted back.
-
Yes hollow words indeed when not backed up by action.
That said - there is a problematic issue at this stage in the campaign with 'suspending candidates', as you cannot actually do it. Ballot papers have been printed and cannot be changed at this stage so a 'suspended candidate' will be on the ballot paper regardless of any suspension and will be on the ballot paper under the name of the party in question. And postal votes have gone out and plenty will already have been posted back.
As was covered in the Labour case yesterday. They can be suspended from the party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0vvjzw5ejno
And that was something that seems much more questionable in terms of whether the candidate should have been suspended than in the Tory two.
-
As was covered in the Labour case yesterday. They can be suspended from the party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0vvjzw5ejno
And that was something that seems much more questionable in terms of whether the candidate should have been suspended than in the Tory two.
I know - but what does it actually mean in practice - really nothing more than the party saying 'don't vote for this chap'. He's still on the ballot paper and his votes will still be counted and if he gets the most votes he will be elected as an MP.
Suspension prior to nominations closing really means something - the party puts in place a new candidate or runs without a candidate. Once the point has been reached where a 'suspended candidate' will still be on the ballot paper that is a very different thing.
-
I know - but what does it actually mean in practice - really nothing more than the party saying 'don't vote for this chap'. He's still on the ballot paper and his votes will still be counted and if he gets the most votes he will be elected as an MP.
Suspension prior to nominations closing really means something - the party puts in place a new candidate or runs without a candidate. Once the point has been reached where a 'suspended candidate' will still be on the ballot paper that is a very different thing.
It means that the party is effectively saying this is not a representative. It will have AB effect on votes, and in this case shows Sunak's cowardice. That said, it was easier for Labour to suspend its candidate as they had no chance.
-
It means that the party is effectively saying this is not a representative. It will have AB effect on votes, and in this case shows Sunak's cowardice. That said, it was easier for Labour to suspend its candidate as they had no chance.
Agree it is easier to suspend when you wouldn't win anyhow.
It will have an effect on votes, but that is massively different to effectively suspending and removing a candidate at an earlier stage when they end up not on the ballot paper.
Remember that many people don't fixate on politics, and vote on the basis of the party. There will be many people go into the ballot box see the Tory (or Labour) logo and place an X, blissfully unaware that the candidate had been 'suspended', indeed in many cases they probably might not have even clocked the name of the candidate in the first place - their intention being to vote Tory or Labour, not for John Jones (The Labour and Cooperative party candidate).
-
Agree it is easier to suspend when you wouldn't win anyhow.
It will have an effect on votes, but that is massively different to effectively suspending and removing a candidate at an earlier stage when they end up not on the ballot paper.
Remember that many people don't fixate on politics, and vote on the basis of the party. There will be many people go into the ballot box see the Tory (or Labour) logo and place an X, blissfully unaware that the candidate had been 'suspended', indeed in many cases they probably might not have even clocked the name of the candidate in the first place - their intention being to vote Tory or Labour, not for John Jones (The Labour and Cooperative party candidate).
Agree.
Though suspension of candidates in a general election, after their names are on the ballot papers, also has a much wider impact than the constituency. Sunak doesn't want the headline of 2 candidates suspended due to possible corruption.
-
Interesting summary of last night's programme. I agree with Starmer that Corbyn would have been a better PM than Johnson but I don't think that's a bar that is anything more than a limbo record.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn00dlzexevo
-
Chris Mason on the betting scandal
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c066lmkr33po
-
'SNP investigated over 'misuse' of election mail stamps' - as election scandals go this is second class
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg334q4z0npo
-
Obviously no point in donating to the Tory Party, they don't represent the best bet, unlike the date of the election.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c800k0p175ro
-
Farage and his love for Putin
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cldd44zv3kpo
-
Viewers in NI have their own programme, as ever
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/news/content/ar-BB1oDkQf
-
Farage and his love for Putin
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cldd44zv3kpo
Be interesting to see if this has any effect on the Reform vote. I imagine there's an substantial number of their support who will agree with him but it may mean that some percentage is pushed back to the Tories.
-
Sunak surpasses Johnson and Corbyn in unpopularity but still trails Truss, the undisputed champion.
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49824-general-election-2024-rishi-sunak-favourability-at-another-all-time-low
-
Chris Mason on the betting scandal
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c066lmkr33po
And another one...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511nv3pjd6o
-
.
-
And another one...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511nv3pjd6o
Tories have finally suspended their candidates.
https://x.com/samcoatessky/status/1805535245590003850?s=46
Worst possible outcome for them surely - they look weak in not taking decisive action early enough and effectively being forced into doing it by the general outrage.
-
Tories have finally suspended their candidates.
https://x.com/samcoatessky/status/1805535245590003850?s=46
Worst possible outcome for them surely - they look weak in not taking decisive action early enough and effectively being forced into doing it by the general outrage.
And I better they would be suspended tomorrow. Damn that inaccurate info.
-
And I better they would be suspended tomorrow. Damn that inaccurate info.
Well Rishi told me he would stand by them, so I put £100 on them being suspended.
It would be hilarious to find a Tory official who had put a bet on them being suspended today. They seem to be so incredibly self destructive that I would not be surprised if we found that it was true.
-
Well Rishi told me he would stand by them, so I put £100 on them being suspended.
It would be hilarious to find a Tory official who had put a bet on them being suspended today. They seem to be so incredibly self destructive that I would not be surprised if we found that it was true.
Would sum it up
-
Just found this piece in the Guardian about John Oliver's piece on the UK election
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/article/2024/jun/24/john-oliver-last-week-tonight-uk-election
Looking forward to finding the actual segment on line
-
Tories have finally suspended their candidates.
https://x.com/samcoatessky/status/1805535245590003850?s=46
Worst possible outcome for them surely - they look weak in not taking decisive action early enough and effectively being forced into doing it by the general outrage.
This will mean total wipeout of the tories in Wales. Most polling has shown that Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr was the only likely hold for the tories, but now that Craig Williams has been suspended that victory seems pretty remote.
-
Just found this piece in the Guardian about John Oliver's piece on the UK election
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/article/2024/jun/24/john-oliver-last-week-tonight-uk-election
Looking forward to finding the actual segment on line
For much of the time Labour has more or less agreed with the Tory policies. I'll have numerous drinks through the morning on the 5th as eejits lose but I don't see it as worth a celebration. I am hoping that Labour can surprise me.
-
This will mean total wipeout of the tories in Wales. Most polling has shown that Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr was the only likely hold for the tories, but now that Craig Williams has been suspended that victory seems pretty remote.
For 500 pounds? Why Craig, it profit a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world. . . but for 500 pounds!
-
For much of the time Labour has more or less agreed with the Tory policies. I'll have numerous drinks through the morning on the 5th as eejits lose but I don't see it as worth a celebration. I am hoping that Labour can surprise me.
I had this discussion with a friend of mine a while ago before we knew when the election would be. I was bemoaning the fact that Labour did not want to address the Brexit issue but his position was: let's get rid of the Tories first and then decide how to go forward.
As John Oliver puts it:
If a wild badger broke into your home and fucked everything up for 14 years straight, tearing absolutely everything apart, you would think: 'OK, you know what, we’ll worry about redecorating choices later. Right now, that badger needs to fucking go.'
-
For much of the time Labour has more or less agreed with the Tory policies. I'll have numerous drinks through the morning on the 5th as eejits lose but I don't see it as worth a celebration. I am hoping that Labour can surprise me.
This is my hope too.
My thoughts are that Starmer is playing it ultra-safe so as not to upset the horses - ok ex-Tories, so unkind to horses. After the election, he'll spring forth like a superhero and fly about in spandex fixing everything.
Or as is more likely we'll get a somewhat improved and competent government - which to be honest I'd settle for.
-
This is my hope too.
My thoughts are that Starmer is playing it ultra-safe so as not to upset the horses - ok ex-Tories, so unkind to horses. After the election, he'll spring forth like a superhero and fly about in spandex fixing everything.
Or as is more likely we'll get a somewhat improved and competent government - which to be honest I'd settle for.
Not an absolutely shite govt would make me happy
-
I had this discussion with a friend of mine a while ago before we knew when the election would be. I was bemoaning the fact that Labour did not want to address the Brexit issue but his position was: let's get rid of the Tories first and then decide how to go forward.
As John Oliver puts it:
And I agree but I just won't be celebrating. Though I may dance a fuck you wild badger dance.
-
One thing that I may well toast is not having a PM who refers to the ECHR as a foreign court. Of all the panders to Reform, that's one I find unfuckingforgivable
-
My husband and I have postal votes, and have already voted.
We should never have left the EU, it was a HUGE mistake and has done the UK no good at all.
-
My husband and I have postal votes, and have already voted.
We should never have left the EU, it was a HUGE mistake and has done the UK no good at all.
me too. Having cut my hair very short and trimmed my beard since the photo was taken, I diidn't want to give some jumped-up Jack-in-office the opportunity to reject my ID.
Agree about the EU.
-
me too. Having cut my hair very short and trimmed my beard since the photo was taken, I diidn't want to give some jumped-up Jack-in-office the opportunity to reject my ID.
Agree about the EU.
Many people didn't really understand what leaving the EU would mean for the UK. Some people I have spoken to about Brexit said other members of their family, or their friends and neighbours and had voted to leave and so did they!
All my family voted to stay in the EU.
-
Latest prediction from Electoral Calculus:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html
Notable in that the Tories are predicted to finish up with fewer seats than the Lib Dems. I don't think this will really happen because I expect the Reform UK ltd vote will collapse in polling booths.
-
Latest prediction from Electoral Calculus:
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html
Notable in that the Tories are predicted to finish up with fewer seats than the Lib Dems. I don't think this will really happen because I expect the Reform UK ltd vote will collapse in polling booths.
The Lib Dem vote being lower than the last election but getting them 9 times the seats is a great illustration of the problems of FPTP
-
Decent article on the effect on Scottish independence of the election. I've never really understood why labour didn't as a party remain agnostic on it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0447rxk7jxo
-
I've never really understood why labour didn't as a party remain agnostic on it.
Then I don't think you really understand the DNA of the Labour party - from establishment they have considered themselves to be internationalist in outlook (rather than nationalist) and indeed part of an international socialist movement.
With that DNA it becomes pretty clear that Labour are going to oppose breaking the UK up into bits.
-
Then I don't think you really understand the DNA of the Labour party - from establishment they have considered themselves to be internationalist in outlook (rather than nationalist) and indeed part of an international socialist movement.
With that DNA it becomes pretty clear that Labour are going to oppose breaking the UK up into bits.
So they will be Unionist about Northern Ireland? And not want a 2 state solution in Palestine?
Wrapping yourself in one flag as opposed to another doesn't make you internationalist.
-
So they will be Unionist about Northern Ireland?
Labour don't stand candidates in NI so the comparison with Scotland isn't really relevant where they do have candidates and MPs etc. But regardless, no I don't believe that Labour supports a united Ireland as a point of principle.
And not want a 2 state solution in Palestine?
Are you really comparing the situation in Palestine with Scottish independence NS :o
Wrapping yourself in one flag as opposed to another doesn't make you internationalist.
And what 'national' flag does Labour wrap itself up in NS. I know they have been a bit more willing to embrace the Union Flag recently, but over the decades Labour have often been criticised for not wrapping themselves up in the British flag.
You'll no doubt be aware that Labour do wrap themselves up in a flag - traditionally singing of it at their conference - that flag is the red flag of the international labour movement. That is all about internationalism, not nationalism.
-
Labour don't stand candidates in NI so the comparison with Scotland isn't really relevant where they do have candidates and MPs etc. But regardless, no I don't believe that Labour supports a united Ireland as a point of principle.
Are you really comparing the situation in Palestine with Scottish independence NS :o
And what 'national' flag does Labour wrap itself up in NS. I know they have been a bit more willing to embrace the Union Flag recently, but over the decades Labour have often been criticised for not wrapping themselves up in the British flag.
You'll no doubt be aware that Labour do wrap themselves up in a flag - traditionally singing of it at their conference - that flag is the red flag of the international labour movement. That is all about internationalism, not nationalism.
Isn't NI part of the UK. And since they aren't a Unionist party as regards it, it would seem thar their 'DNA' is malleable.
Same applies to Palestine. You were the one being absolutist, it would appear that isn't the case.
And you were the one to espouse the UK which is not in thar sense internationalist. So if Labour stands up for the Union they are saying that the UK is better. It's just a different nationalism.
-
Isn't NI part of the UK. And since they aren't a Unionist party as regards it, it would seem thar their 'DNA' is malleable.
Same applies to Palestine. You were the one being absolutist, it would appear that isn't the case.
And you were the one to espouse the UK which is not in thar sense internationalist. So if Labour stands up for the Union they are saying that the UK is better. It's just a different nationalism.
I'm not sure what your point is here NS. I do not know what Labour's policy is on Northern Ireland, but unless they support complete independence for NI, then it is surely a "unionist" policy - either a union with the UK, or a union with the Republic of Ireland.
As for Palestine, the situation there is such that a single state would spell disaster for the Jews who live there and also for the gay and lesbian population and well as women. I would not fault Labour for prioritising reality over a general principle. More people should do that.
-
I'm not sure what your point is here NS. I do not know what Labour's policy is on Northern Ireland, but unless they support complete independence for NI, then it is surely a "unionist" policy - either a union with the UK, or a union with the Republic of Ireland.
As for Palestine, the situation there is such that a single state would spell disaster for the Jews who live there and also for the gay and lesbian population and well as women. I would not fault Labour for prioritising reality over a general principle. More people should do that.
My point is that the Labour Party has and is allowed to have policies in different areas about whether places should have independence that are different. There is some magical DNA that means you can claim to be just an internationalist party as Prof D puts forward. The Labour Part allowed dissent on membership of the EU, I don't see why ot can't allow for agnosticism as regards Scottish independence.
-
My point is that the Labour Party has and is allowed to have policies in different areas about whether places should have independence that are different. There is some magical DNA that means you can claim to be just an internationalist party as Prof D puts forward. The Labour Part allowed dissent on membership of the EU, I don't see why ot can't allow for agnosticism as regards Scottish independence.
Maybe Labour takes a unionist view of Scotland because it believes that it would be absolute madness to give it independence. Sometimes parties stand on principle rather than votes. I know that's rare these days.
-
Maybe Labour takes a unionist view of Scotland because it believes that it would be absolute madness to give it independence. Sometimes parties stand on principle rather than votes. I know that's rare these days.
They might do but there's always been a number of independence supporters in the party. As the article covered, it's going to have a good number of people voting for it that support independence, I think possibly about a third of their votes. It seems to me it would be easier to deal with that if the party took a position that allowed members to support independence.
-
More bets. This one from Philip Davies on himself to lose.
I have to admit he will be on my list of Portillo moments as he's odious. And while I might agree there is nothing necessarily illegal about such a bet, it stinks morally, and if it was for 8k then shows how out of touch he is.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxw2lm2mm14o
-
I'm not sure what your point is here NS. I do not know what Labour's policy is on Northern Ireland, but unless they support complete independence for NI, then it is surely a "unionist" policy - either a union with the UK, or a union with the Republic of Ireland.
Absolutely correct, which is why NS's comparison of Scotland and NI in nationalist terms is non-sense.
Nationalism in NI and Scotland mean completely different things. In Scotland it is about Scotland becoming a distinct independent nation state. That isn't what nationalism in NI means at all - I don't think anyone is arguing for NI to be a distinct independent nation state. Rather, the nationalists want NI to be part of the Republic of Ireland, rather than the UK. So NI 'nationalists' are really unionists, just that the 'union' they want isn't with the UK but with the Republic of Ireland.
-
Absolutely correct, which is why NS's comparison of Scotland and NI in nationalist terms is non-sense.
Nationalism in NI and Scotland mean completely different things. In Scotland it is about Scotland becoming a distinct independent nation state. That isn't what nationalism in NI means at all - I don't think anyone is arguing for NI to be a distinct independent nation state. Rather, the nationalists want NI to be part of the Republic of Ireland, rather than the UK. So NI 'nationalists' are really unionists, just that the 'union' they want isn't with the UK but with the Republic of Ireland.
And Labour's attitude to independence is different in different cases. Which is perfectly reasonable as opposed to asserting that it is in its 'DNA' to oppose it as an absolute.
-
And Labour's attitude to independence is different in different cases.
Except you haven't been able to provide a credible example to support your assertion. The NI situation is completely different - not about independence at all. And Palestine is again completely different - I actually don't think Labour's really preference is a two state solution - rather I think they'd actually prefer a situation where jews and palestinians are able to coexist safely and peacefully within a single state. That this doesn't appear possible is the driver for a 'second best' preference for a two state solution rather than the current status quo. So there is no principle for independence, rather a pragmatic 'second best' (but better than status quo) approach.
Which is perfectly reasonable as opposed to asserting that it is in its 'DNA' to oppose it as an absolute.
You are completely misunderstanding what I mean - that something is in the DNA of a party means that it is a core, defining part of the values of a party. That doesn't mean that it is inalienable and that there may be pragmatic reasons why that core value might be set aside at times. But that doesn't change basic instincts.
Sunak keeps talking about tax cutting being in the DNA of the tories - I wouldn't argue with that - their instincts are always around cutting tax and shrinking the state. That sometimes they don't deliver on this (e.g. right now where taxes are at historic highs and they've broken the state!!) doesn't change their instincts and that tax cutting is in their DNA.
-
Except you haven't been able to provide a credible example to support your assertion. The NI situation is completely different - not about independence at all. And Palestine is again completely different - I actually don't think Labour's really preference is a two state solution - rather I think they'd actually prefer a situation where jews and palestinians are able to coexist safely and peacefully within a single state. That this doesn't appear possible is the driver for a 'second best' preference for a two state solution rather than the current status quo. So there is no principle for independence, rather a pragmatic 'second best' (but better than status quo) approach.
You are completely misunderstanding what I mean - that something is in the DNA of a party means that it is a core, defining part of the values of a party. That doesn't mean that it is inalienable and that there may be pragmatic reasons why that core value might be set aside at times. But that doesn't change basic instincts.
Sunak keeps talking about tax cutting being in the DNA of the tories - I wouldn't argue with that - their instincts are always around cutting tax and shrinking the state. That sometimes they don't deliver on this (e.g. right now where taxes are at historic highs and they've broken the state!!) doesn't change their instincts and that tax cutting is in their DNA.
Special pleading.
-
Special pleading.
Nope - are you really claiming that the situation in NI and Palestine regarding independence are somehow analogous to Scotland? You are simply trying to compare apples with bananas. Come back when you are willing to compare apples with apples.
-
Nope - are you really claiming that the situation in NI and Palestine regarding independence are somehow analogous to Scotland? You are simply trying to compare apples with bananas. Come back when you are willing to compare apples with apples.
Again, I'm simply saying that the Labour
Party develops policy based on the situation. You're the one claiming that they have to be opposed as a party to Scottish independence because of some mythical 'DNA'.
-
Again, I'm simply saying that the Labour
Party develops policy based on the situation.you're the one claiming that they have to be opposed as a party to ascotiish independence because of some mythical 'DNA'.
So are you trying to argue that political parties somehow do not have overarching values and instincts - their DNA so to speak. Sure policies will be developed as and when needed, but they will still be guided by those overarching principles.
-
So are you trying to argue that political parties somehow do not have overarching values and instincts - their DNA so to speak. Sure policies will be developed as and when needed, but they will still be guided by those overarching principles.
I'm saying that saying that there is some basic principle in the Labour Party that means it has to be opposed to Scottish independence is simply an assertion from you.
-
The Labour Part allowed dissent on membership of the EU, I don't see why ot can't allow for agnosticism as regards Scottish independence.
It seems to me it would be easier to deal with that if the party took a position that allowed members to support independence.
You seem to be arguing that if you support independence that you are banned from being a member of the Labour party!!
In which case, evidence please.
Labour, along with most political parties, are broad churches. They have members with a wide variety of views on a whole range of issues. And whisper it quietly, in some cases those individual views may not align with the 'official' party position on specific matters. That doesn't stop individuals being members.
-
I'm saying that saying that there is some basic principle in the Labour Party that means it has to be opposed to Scottish independence is simply an assertion from you.
One backed up by the evidence of the history and values of the Labour party as being internationalist rather than nationalist.
So over to you NS - have you found that apple to compare with an apple, or are you still arguing that because the Labour party might suggest that a banana is long thin and yellow that it is inconsistent if it considers an apple to be round-ish and green (or red).
-
One backed up by the evidence of the history and values of the Labour party as being internationalist rather than nationalist.
So over to you NS - have you found that apple to compare with an apple, or are you still arguing that because the Labour party might suggest that a banana is long thin and yellow that it is inconsistent if it considers an apple to be round-ish and green (or red).
Oh look another assertion.
If you want me to provide a case that is exactly like Scottish independence there isn't any. That's why you are special pleading since you are simply saying that it's opposed to Scottish independence because it's Scottish independence.
The Labour Party does not oppose NI leaving the UK. It does support the independence of a PLestinian state. It can have policies based on the situation, and it dies. The evidence shows thar. You just repeat assertions about DNA.
-
You seem to be arguing that if you support independence that you are banned from being a member of the Labour party!!
In which case, evidence please.
Labour, along with most political parties, are broad churches. They have members with a wide variety of views on a whole range of issues. And whisper it quietly, in some cases those individual views may not align with the 'official' party position on specific matters. That doesn't stop individuals being members.
I know it's broad church. That's been my point from the beginning. You think though that those members and voters who might believe in independence for Scotland are going against the 'DNA' of the party.
-
I know it's broad church. That's been my point from the beginning. You think though that those members and voters who might believe in independence for Scotland are going against the 'DNA' of the party.
Nice diversionary tactic NS.
You have asserted that if you support independence that you are banned from being a member of the Labour party. Evidence please.
-
Nice diversionary tactic NS.
You have asserted that if you support independence that you are banned from being a member of the Labour party. Evidence please.
Oh look, misrepresentation.
-
If you want me to provide a case that is exactly like Scottish independence there isn't any.
You are correct that there are no other independence campaigns for independence for a place called ... err ... Scotland. No shit Sherlock.
But there are plenty which have features that are pretty well identical (e.g. long-standing and stable union with all parts of that union having democratic rights, without recent history of violent oppression from the central government etc), including Wales and Cornwall in the UK. And Catalonia and the Basque region in Spain/France. In fact there are absolutely loads of them - select those that have the features I describe from this very, very long list.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_Europe
-
Oh look, misrepresentation.
Nope - how else would you interpret:
"It seems to me it would be easier to deal with that if the party took a position that allowed members to support independence"
So which is it NS - are you going to retract that comment in which you clearly assert that the Labour party does not currently allow its members to support independence. Alternatively you can provide some evidence to back up your assertion. Choice is yours NS.
-
Nope - how else would you interpret:
"It seems to me it would be easier to deal with that if the party took a position that allowed members to support independence"
So which is it NS - are you going to retract that comment in which you clearly assert that the Labour party does not currently allow its members to support independence. Alternatively you can provide some evidence to back up your assertion. Choice is yours NS.
Because they aren't allowed to be candidates and campaign for it. It's whipped. The whole point of this is arguing for agnosticism as a policy on independence something which you oppose.
-
You are correct that there are no other independence campaigns for independence for a place called ... err ... Scotland. No shit Sherlock.
But there are plenty which have features that are pretty well identical (e.g. long-standing and stable union with all parts of that union having democratic rights, without recent history of violent oppression from the central government etc), including Wales and Cornwall in the UK. And Catalonia and the Basque region in Spain/France. In fact there are absolutely loads of them - select those that have the features I describe from this very, very long list.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_Europe
So Labour opposed the split of Czechia and Slovakia? Surely democratic rights include independence?
-
Because they aren't allowed to be candidates and campaign for it. It's whipped. The whole point of this is arguing for agnosticism as a policy on independence something which you oppose.
Oh dear - when in a hole, stop digging.
Your assertion is about Labour members, not candidates (one is a very small subset of the other). So again - evidence please that Labour party does not currently allow its members to support independence.
Oh and by the way rebelling against a Labour whip position does not automatically get you expelled from the party - you can remain an elected MP, MSP, candidate and member even if you rebel. I had a very close link with a guy who was a Labour MP from 1997 to 2005 - he was rather proud of his rebellious status - he went against the Labour whip many times - he was never expelled from the party (although he did lose to the tories in 2005).
-
Corbyn to win in Islington?
-
Clumsy and thoughtless.
https://www.itv.com/news/2024-06-26/starmer-faces-backlash-over-comments-singling-out-bangladeshi-migrants
-
Oh Nigel the mask slips. Of course, none of these thoughts or prejudices have ever crossed your mind:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/27/reform-uk-activist-filmed-making-racist-comments-about-rishi-sunak
-
'Postal delays leave Scottish holidaymakers unable to vote' have a friend hoping he gets his today otherwise he'll miss it.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9x84wg206eo
-
'Postal delays leave Scottish holidaymakers unable to vote' have a friend hoping he gets his today otherwise he'll miss it.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9x84wg206eo
I imagine this is a problem UK-wide, but recognise there may be a particular issue in Scotland as their school holidays start earlier.
I wonder whether there will be a disproportionate effect on certain demographics - certainly in England private schools finish earlier than state schools so those families often head off on holiday before state schools have broken up.
I wonder also whether there will be issues for university students - we are now outside of term time, so plenty will have registered in their university constituency but will need their postal vote to be sent to their home address. And quite likely many will also be away around this time - again to get holiday in before schools break up in England.
-
Scottish councils actions to deal with the postal vote issue
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/news/content/ar-BB1p4P2K?ocid=sapphireappshare
-
Reform 'drop' 3 candidates. I wouldn't mind a list of all.the suspended candidates who are still on the ballot paper. I'm sure I will have missed a few.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c727xz2kkgjo
-
Local Labour members resign to campaign for Corbyn - one of those seats that will add interest the overall results becomes too obvious after exit polls and first results.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgejv0xxg2o
-
Interesting article on history of UK elections, tied into art and literature, by Simon Schama
https://archive.vn/IWrPq
-
Wow!
Sunday Times newspaper endorses Labour Party - BBC News (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj504619e63o)
The Tories have forfeited the right to govern. Over to Labour - The Sunday Times (Archive) (https://archive.ph/zC8Qq)
-
Latest Tory next leader odds. Badenoch clear favourite, Farage drifting a bit
-
Latest Tory next leader odds. Badenoch clear favourite, Farage drifting a bit
Who cares? The Tories will be out of power for the rest of my life, and whoever becomes leader won't become PM, just as Hague, IDS, Howard etc. didn't between 97 and 10.
-
Who cares? The Tories will be out of power for the rest of my life, and whoever becomes leader won't become PM, just as Hague, IDS, Howard etc. didn't between 97 and 10.
Because the tone of political debate is important. If Farage became the leader of the opposition it has a huge affect on what happens all round.
-
Wow!
Sunday Times newspaper endorses Labour Party - BBC News (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj504619e63o)
The Tories have forfeited the right to govern. Over to Labour - The Sunday Times (Archive) (https://archive.ph/zC8Qq)
When Rupe switches his papers to Labour, you know it's all over for the Tories.
-
Who cares? The Tories will be out of power for the rest of my life, and whoever becomes leader won't become PM, just as Hague, IDS, Howard etc. didn't between 97 and 10.
I hope you're right, but it's all too easy to see how it might go terribly wrong. Remember the IFS saying that neither main party was being at all honest about the state the country's finances are in, and that big tax rises or deep cuts will be needed.
Labour will, if it wins, inherit a total mess, and it's hard to see that their 'funding everything with growth' idea is realistic. I can see public disappointment and the far right simplistic nonsense of Nasty Nigel and that the Tories seem set to go even further with ("it's all the immigrants' and the ECHR's fault, tax cuts for everybody, privatise the NHS, screw everybody on benefits,..."), benefitting from a backlash.
Remember, the UK electorate was stupid enough to vote for Brexit, based on nothing but lies and fantasies.
According to the Get Voting tactical voting (https://www.getvoting.org/) page, in my constituency, I can "vote with my heart" because Labour is way ahead of every other party, but guess who's in second place... Yep, Reform UK. :(
-
I hope you're right, but it's all too easy to see how it might go terribly wrong. Remember the IFS saying that neither main party was being at all honest about the state the country's finances are in, and that big tax rises or deep cuts will be needed.
Labour will, if it wins, inherit a total mess, and it's hard to see that their 'funding everything with growth' idea is realistic. I can see public disappointment and the far right simplistic nonsense of Nasty Nigel and that the Tories seem set to go even further with ("it's all the immigrants' and the ECHR's fault, tax cuts for everybody, privatise the NHS, screw everybody on benefits,..."), benefitting from a backlash.
Remember, the UK electorate was stupid enough to vote for Brexit, based on nothing but lies and fantasies.
According to the Get Voting tactical voting (https://www.getvoting.org/) page, in my constituency, I can "vote with my heart" because Labour is way ahead of every other party, but guess who's in second place... Yep, Reform UK. :(
I mostly agree but the idea that the electorate is just stupid or racist because they vote for things you disagree with is part of the problem. Immigration is fine if you plan for it but it is obvious in lots of ways it wasn't planned for in terms of its impact. And when services are strained then its not stupid for people to feel that the status quo will be part of the problem.
Brexit was in part lost because too many people who opposed told people who were considering voting for it that was because they were stupid and/or racist.
-
Hardly anyone, in my neck of the woods, is displaying party-political poster in their windows or gardens. I've only seen one, for the Lib Dems. Does this indicate apathy?
-
Hardly anyone, in my neck of the woods, is displaying party-political poster in their windows or gardens. I've only seen one, for the Lib Dems. Does this indicate apathy?
Surely it's that even many that care will vote against something rather than for it. And even where they don't I doubt apathy is the only cause. A despair of what is offered?
-
Surely it's that even many that care will vote against something rather than for it. And even where they don't I doubt apathy is the only cause. A despair of what is offered?
I think the world has moved on from the traditional party poster and garden stakes of old. Sure a few people still display them (there are certainly plenty of LidDem posters/stakes around here) but I think nowadays those that want to demonstrate their support for a particular party are more likely to do so via their social media activities.
-
Reform candidate jumps to Tories
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgk44k4mzxo
-
On our street in Worthing we have plenty of posters up - mostly Labour. I've only seen one Tory poster on the next street down.
-
I mostly agree but the idea that the electorate is just stupid or racist because they vote for things you disagree with is part of the problem. Immigration is fine if you plan for it but it is obvious in lots of ways it wasn't planned for in terms of its impact. And when services are strained then its not stupid for people to feel that the status quo will be part of the problem.
Brexit was in part lost because too many people who opposed told people who were considering voting for it that was because they were stupid and/or racist.
I wasn't suggesting that it be used as a campaign slogan, and I agree about the Brexit mistake, but it kind of makes my point. It's not rational to vote against your own interests because you feel insulted. Brexit was against the status quo but it was always clear that it would only make things worse for most people.
You're also right about immigration not being planned for, but it's all too easy for those in power to cover up their own planing failures by simply blaming immigration itself. Actually, it's worse than that, they are trying to blame the relatively small number of asylum seekers - the "small boats". The small boats could be stopped immediately by simply providing a safe and legal way for people in France (and preferably more widely) to apply for asylum in the UK. The planning for the relatively small numbers (compared to legal immigration) should be relatively straightforward, given that most successful applicants will work and contribute to the economy.
Collectively, the electorate do behave stupidly, but it's not all about individuals being stupid (although about half of them are below average intelligence) it's partly ignorance, lots of people don't follow politics much at all and only end up with a few sound bites that have filtered through.
I think it was Robert A. Heinlein who said, "There are perhaps 5% of the population that simply can't think. There are another 5% who can, and do. The remaining 90% can think, but don't." I think this is doubly true of engagement with political issues so as to make an informed choice.
Nasty Nigel doesn't have any worked out policies, just some vacuous slogans. He says "zero net migration" but there's no clue how he'd actual achieve that. And yet large numbers of people are turning to Reform UK because of the slogans alone.
There are also the normal cognitive biases that you have to work hard to avoid. A comforting lie can easily appeal more than the hard truth. And since Trump in the US and Johnson here, some politicians seem to think that utterly brazen, barefaced lies are now acceptable. They can easily stick in some people's minds if it's something they find plausible, aligns with what they already think, and they don't pay enough attention to fact-check.
-
Risky pretending he cares tuppence about football.
-
Hardly anyone, in my neck of the woods, is displaying party-political poster in their windows or gardens. I've only seen one, for the Lib Dems. Does this indicate apathy?
I haven't seen any posters either, in windows either which is very unusual, although many people are talking about the up coming election..
-
I think Prof. Davey is right: people nowadays express their loyalties on social media.
-
Risky pretending he cares tuppence about football.
I'm inclined to accept that he cares enough about it to be excited by a last gasp equaliser, and extra time win in the Euros for England. There are lots of people who might watch and get excited by this, or sports at the Olympics that never watch it outside of them.
Good piece of propaganda from the Tories though
-
I think Prof. Davey is right: people nowadays express their loyalties on social media.
I was in Amersham just before the by election in 2021 and it was covered in Lib Dem posters. I suspect that it may be in certain seats that there is more activity. I wonder what Rochdale or Clacton or Bristol West look like. Perhaps Jeremyp could help with the last one?
Anecdotally, I've seen less posting on social media this time from friends than 2019 though probably more from parties.
-
Risky pretending he cares tuppence about football.
I'm no fan of Sunak, but I think that is a lazy assertion.
As far as I understand Sunak grew up as a pretty big fan of Southampton and I've no doubt he has retained an interest in both them and football in general thereafter. To imply that because he is from a hugely advantaged, elite background - being sent to private schools, including one of the top ones in the country, plus Oxford etc, plus his wealth means he cannot be interested in football is a bit of a lazy generalisation.
Actually I think both Sunak and Starmer are pretty keen football fans.
-
As far as I understand Sunak grew up as a pretty big fan of Southampton and I've no doubt he has retained an interest in both them and football in general thereafter.
As a child of the Portsmouth area, I have it on good authority you can be a lifelong fan of Southampton and not care about quality football at all... :-X ;D
O.
-
As a child of the Portsmouth area, I have it on good authority you can be a lifelong fan of Southampton and not care about quality football at all... :-X ;D
O.
Indeed - and I gather those in Southampton think exactly the same ... about Portsmouth!!
-
I was in Amersham just before the by election in 2021 and it was covered in Lib Dem posters. I suspect that it may be in certain seats that there is more activity. I wonder what Rochdale or Clacton or Bristol West look like. Perhaps Jeremyp could help with the last one?
I read this and wondered why there would be Lib Dem posters in the Netherlands. I misread "Amersham" as "Amsterdam"!
-
I was in Amersham just before the by election in 2021 and it was covered in Lib Dem posters. I suspect that it may be in certain seats that there is more activity. I wonder what Rochdale or Clacton or Bristol West look like. Perhaps Jeremyp could help with the last one?
By-elections are certainly a bit different to general elections in terms of visibility.
My impression is that posters etc tend to be restricted to parties that are minor enough not to seem threatening but major enough to have the resources. So LibDem and Green largely and pretty minimal presence for Labour and virtually non existent for the Tories. And, of course, it also depends on which parties are most likely to be competitive in a particular constituency.
We've got a decent amount in St Albans, but then there is always a pretty good presence even at local elections. Certainly less than 1997 or 2001 etc but still a reasonable amount. Both my next door neighbours have stake/poster - one side LibDem, the other both LibDem and Green!! I used to always have a Labour stake (indeed for many years I was one of the team going around putting them up) but gave up when I stopped being a member after Corbyn became leader.
-
Indeed - and I gather those in Southampton think exactly the same ... about Portsmouth!!
Nah, who ever heard of a Saints supporter being able to think? :-\
-
Just received two leaflets from Labour and one from the Greens through the door. The Labour ones can be used as small posters - just the word "Change" on a red background - so I put one in the front window, and one in the side one. Pity, really - I'd love to support the Greens, but the only chance of defeating the Tories in Hemel is by voting Labour. Still, the Labour bloke seems like a good bloke.
-
Ed Davey's silly stunts are doing the Lib Dems no good whatsoever. I know some people who usually voted for them aren't going to do so this time around, because they have been put off by his behaviour. My husband and I used to vote Tory when were were young, but decided to give the Lib Dems our vote, when Maggie Thatcher met with our disapproval. We certainly wouldn't be voting for them now! :o
-
Ed Davey's silly stunts are doing the Lib Dems no good whatsoever. I know some people who usually voted for them aren't going to do so this time around, because they have been put off by his behaviour. My husband and I used to vote Tory when were were young, but decided to give the Lib Dems our vote, when Maggie Thatcher met with our disapproval. We certainly would be voting for them now! :o
I think he knows what he's doing - he wants to portray himself as not taking himself too seriosly.. His stunts don't seem to be harming the Lib Dems in the polls.
-
Ed Davey's silly stunts are doing the Lib Dems no good whatsoever. I know some people who usually voted for them aren't going to do so this time around, because they have been put off by his behaviour. My husband and I used to vote Tory when were were young, but decided to give the Lib Dems our vote, when Maggie Thatcher met with our disapproval. We certainly would be voting for them now! :o
I disagree and so do a load of political commentators who think that Davey's approach has been pretty inspired.
As a small party it can be pretty difficult to get any kind of 'cut through' in the media. Davey has done this, by getting media coverage for his 'stunts' but each one is actually backed up by a pretty carefully worked through serious point. His serious points have got heard because his stunts have got people's (and the media's) attention.
He's also got Daisy (Cooper - deputy leader) as his 'serious' side kick - he does the stunts and sometimes he does the serious follow up, sometime daisy does. Whichever way they've been heard in a way they weren't in 2017 and 2019.
-
I disagree and so do a load of political commentators who think that Davey's approach has been pretty inspired.
As a small party it can be pretty difficult to get any kind of 'cut through' in the media. Davey has done this, by getting media coverage for his 'stunts' but each one is actually backed up by a pretty carefully worked through serious point. His serious points have got heard because his stunts have got people's (and the media's) attention.
He's also got Daisy (Cooper - deputy leader) as his 'serious' side kick - he does the stunts and sometimes he does the serious follow up, sometime daisy does. Whichever way they've been heard in a way they weren't in 2017 and 2019.
Is he a relation?
-
I disagree and so do a load of political commentators who think that Davey's approach has been pretty inspired.
As a small party it can be pretty difficult to get any kind of 'cut through' in the media. Davey has done this, by getting media coverage for his 'stunts' but each one is actually backed up by a pretty carefully worked through serious point. His serious points have got heard because his stunts have got people's (and the media's) attention.
He's also got Daisy (Cooper - deputy leader) as his 'serious' side kick - he does the stunts and sometimes he does the serious follow up, sometime daisy does. Whichever way they've been heard in a way they weren't in 2017 and 2019.
Agree, and part of it is that it gives news broadcasters an easy story with pictures as opposed to visiting a factory and giving a speech. They then will tend to cover it, and there's even been a sort of relief when they get to the story.
-
Is he a relation?
No - but good spot.
I actually think he's been a pretty useless leader - Daisy would have been much better. But he and the LibDems have come up with a pretty inspired way of getting coverage when your leader is (on the face of it) pretty dull and uninspiring.
-
The Little Racist Frog - The Marsh Family
https://youtu.be/RhBYzNv4N_E?si=vmOJUCZYyzrzotoC
(Normally I'd put this on the music thread - but I think it sits better here)
-
Just watched the latest Last Week Tonight with John Oliver on the UK election. Well worth a watch if you have access to Sky or NOW. Classic rundown on the last 14 years of Tory nonsense, including this classic clip (which I'd almost forgotten) in which Boris Johnson, while being confronted by an angry parent about the NHS, lies that there are 'no press here' while literally being filmed by the press.
'There’s no press here?': father of hospital patient confronts Boris Johnson (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2019/sep/18/boris-johnson-confronted-patient-father-nhs-waiting-times-video)
-
'Backlash as Tories attack Starmer for saying he wants to spend time with his family after 6pm on Fridays' - and good for the backlash.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-6pm-tories-sunak-election-b2572324.html
-
I think he knows what he's doing - he wants to portray himself as not taking himself too seriosly.. His stunts don't seem to be harming the Lib Dems in the polls.
I think the Lib-Dems are benefitting a lot from the "vote tactically to get the Tories out" campaigns.
Electoral Calculus currently predicts them forming the Official Opposition.
-
A cartoon in the latest 'Private Eye' points out that our election is on July 4th, America's traditional fireworks night, while theirs is on November 5th, our fireworks night.
-
'Backlash as Tories attack Starmer for saying he wants to spend time with his family after 6pm on Fridays' - and good for the backlash.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-6pm-tories-sunak-election-b2572324.html
it's actually still amazing to me how much distilled idiocy there is in all the Tory quotes here.
-
The latest 'Private Eye' describes the action of the woman who threw a milkshake at Farage as "lactosing the intolerant".
-
Just curious - anyone voting Tory?
-
Just curious - anyone voting Tory?
Never have, suspect I never will.
-
it's actually still amazing to me how much distilled idiocy there is in all the Tory quotes here.
No more honest under Sunak than they were under Johnson.
-
No more honest under Sunak than they were under Johnson.
It's not just the dishonesty that gets me, it's the stupidity of saying it. Any politician with a functioning brain should immediately think of what Friday night might mean to some of the population
-
With the postal votes problems, in part caused by Sunak not giving a shite about Scotland, I wondered how the French managed to hold an election in less time, and it's because there are no postal votes in France.
-
Simon Jenkins in the Guardian suggests (I think - his words weren't altogether clear) that if, after Thursday, a number of smaller parties could summon up between them more MPs than the Tories,, they could form a coalition official opposition.
-
Simon Jenkins in the Guardian suggests (I think - his words weren't altogether clear) that if, after Thursday, a number of smaller parties could summon up between them more MPs than the Tories,, they could form a coalition official opposition.
I think it would be hard to show how that would work for them to be regarded as a unit.
-
it's actually still amazing to me how much distilled idiocy there is in all the Tory quotes here.
Come Friday, many of them will be discovering their work-life balance will be very much skewed towards "life".
-
Simon Jenkins in the Guardian suggests (I think - his words weren't altogether clear) that if, after Thursday, a number of smaller parties could summon up between them more MPs than the Tories,, they could form a coalition official opposition.
It might not be necessary
-
She's only just found out? Did she think she'd joined the Green Party?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/02/second-reform-candidate-quits-over-racism-and-misogyny
-
She's only just found out? Did she think she'd joined the Green Party?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/02/second-reform-candidate-quits-over-racism-and-misogyny
Yep, it would just have been the antisemitism, and policy of misogyny with the Green Party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7228qnz555o
-
She's only just found out? Did she think she'd joined the Green Party?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jul/02/second-reform-candidate-quits-over-racism-and-misogyny
Hmmm
David appears to have been a replacement for a previous Reform UK candidate in the West Ham and Beckton constituency. Until earlier this year, Peter Monks had been the candidate before his name disappeared from the party’s website.
I wonder what happened to Peter Monks.
-
I wasn't suggesting that it be used as a campaign slogan, and I agree about the Brexit mistake, but it kind of makes my point. It's not rational to vote against your own interests because you feel insulted. Brexit was against the status quo but it was always clear that it would only make things worse for most people.
You're also right about immigration not being planned for, but it's all too easy for those in power to cover up their own planing failures by simply blaming immigration itself. Actually, it's worse than that, they are trying to blame the relatively small number of asylum seekers - the "small boats". The small boats could be stopped immediately by simply providing a safe and legal way for people in France (and preferably more widely) to apply for asylum in the UK. The planning for the relatively small numbers (compared to legal immigration) should be relatively straightforward, given that most successful applicants will work and contribute to the economy.
Collectively, the electorate do behave stupidly, but it's not all about individuals being stupid (although about half of them are below average intelligence) it's partly ignorance, lots of people don't follow politics much at all and only end up with a few sound bites that have filtered through.
I think it was Robert A. Heinlein who said, "There are perhaps 5% of the population that simply can't think. There are another 5% who can, and do. The remaining 90% can think, but don't." I think this is doubly true of engagement with political issues so as to make an informed choice.
Nasty Nigel doesn't have any worked out policies, just some vacuous slogans. He says "zero net migration" but there's no clue how he'd actual achieve that. And yet large numbers of people are turning to Reform UK because of the slogans alone.
There are also the normal cognitive biases that you have to work hard to avoid. A comforting lie can easily appeal more than the hard truth. And since Trump in the US and Johnson here, some politicians seem to think that utterly brazen, barefaced lies are now acceptable. They can easily stick in some people's
minds if it's something they find plausible, aligns with what they already think, and they don't pay enough attention to fact-check.
Do you have a special mirror that you look at when you leave the house or just use the one in the hall, to look at yourself while you nod and say 'Clever me'?
-
Do you have a special mirror that you look at when you leave the house or just use the one in the hall, to look at yourself while you nod and say 'Clever me'?
Have you got a point to make?
-
Have you got a point to make?
That saying people are stupid because they disagree with you, which is all Stranger has repeated, is narcissistic.
I did think that was fairly clear. I must try harder.
-
That saying people are stupid because they disagree with you,
He didn't say people are stupid, he said that collectively the electorate behaves stupidly and he gave reasons as to why they do so, none of which were "all the individuals are stupid".
We all behave stupidly from time to time for various reasons, not necessarily related to our innate intellectual abilities.
Furthermore, even had The Stranger said "people are stupid because they disagree with me" (which he didn't), you don't have to sink to the same level.
-
He didn't say people are stupid, he said that collectively the electorate behaves stupidly and he gave reasons as to why they do so, none of which were "all the individuals are stupid".
We all behave stupidly from time to time for various reasons, not necessarily related to our innate intellectual abilities.
Furthermore, even had The Stranger said "people are stupid because they disagree with me" (which he didn't), you don't have to sink to the same level.
He's said thar people who voted for Brexit are stupid, and that's pretty much based on him just thinking he's right. It's the same problem with people dismissing those voting for Trump as stupid. Things are more complex than that.
I agree we are all stupid at times. That just backs up my point that dismissing 50% of the population as stupid because they voted for something you disagree with seems incredibly narcissistic to me.
-
He's said thar people who voted for Brexit are stupid,
No he didn't. He said the UK electorate was stupid enough to vote for Brexit. He then went on to clarify that collectives can make bad decisions even when the individuals in them are not necessarily stupid, listing some reasons as to why that may happen.
and that's pretty much based on him just thinking he's right.
Not really. I'd say that, objectively, Brexit was a stupid decision. Even some of the people who voted for it now think it was a bit stupid.
It's the same problem with people dismissing those voting for Trump as stupid. Things are more complex than that.
I agree we are all stupid at times. That just backs up my point that dismissing 50% of the population as stupid because they voted for something you disagree with seems incredibly narcissistic to me.
I would agree with that but Stranger didn't say that (except for the claim that 50% of people are more stupid than average, which is definitionally true if the average used is the median).
-
No he didn't. He said the UK electorate was stupid enough to vote for Brexit. He then went on to clarify that collectives can make bad decisions even when the individuals in them are not necessarily stupid, listing some reasons as to why that may happen.
Not really. I'd say that, objectively, Brexit was a stupid decision. Even some of the people who voted for it now think it was a bit stupid.
I would agree with that but Stranger didn't say that (except for the claim that 50% of people are more stupid than average, which is definitionally true if the average used is the median).
He quoted Heinlein in a way that made clear he regards himself as one of the 5% who can think and do - that seems narcissistic to me.
As to Brexit, surely, as with all political decisions it's about what you judge as important to you? I know lots of people who voted for it who are in any sense I understand as intelligent. Therefore it seems to me that dismissing those who vote for it as stupid because it's a decision I disagree with is highly questionable.
-
That saying people are stupid because they disagree with you, which is all Stranger has repeated, is narcissistic.
If the polls are to be believed, the electorate appears to be about to do something I agree with (as the least bad option in the circumstances). My points still stand.
-
If the polls are to be believed, the electorate appears to be about to do something I agree with (as the least bad option in the circumstances). My points still stand.
Your points still seem to me that you are enormously self regarding, and that it must be quite dangerous in terms of whether you pull a muscle patting yourself on the back so frequently.
-
Carol Vorderperson on how to get rid of the Tories fir a generation.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/03/tactical-voting-tories-voters
-
Your points still seem to me that you are enormously self regarding, and that it must be quite dangerous in terms of whether you pull a muscle patting yourself on the back so frequently.
I put forward my arguments, and you've ignored them in favour of cheap ad homs, and rather ironic ones too, considering how you post here sometimes.
Whatever, if calling me names makes you happy, you're welcome. Glad to be of service.....
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-
I put forward my arguments, and you've ignored them in favour of cheap ad homs, and rather ironic ones too, considering how you post here sometimes.
Whatever, if calling me names makes you happy, you're welcome. Glad to be of service.....
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
No, you haven't made any arguments. You've just asserted that people who voted for Brexit are stupid, and quoted Heinlein in a self aggrandising manner.
Nice use of the tu quoque there as well.
-
Carol Vorderperson on how to get rid of the Tories fir a generation.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jul/03/tactical-voting-tories-voters
Oddly, I'm hoping that the result is so ridiculous in terms of votes to seats that it makes obvious the case for PR, and Labour finally have some guts on the matter, so that in 5 years time the Tories could well return.
-
He quoted Heinlein in a way that made clear he regards himself as one of the 5% who can think and do - that seems narcissistic to me.
He clearly is one of the 5% that can think and do, as am I and as are you. I don't really think it is narcissistic to have a realistic opinion on some ability you might have.
I don't think Heinlein is 100% right. I think the 5% varies depending on the subject.
As to Brexit, surely, as with all political decisions it's about what you judge as important to you? I know lots of people who voted for it who are in any sense I understand as intelligent. Therefore it seems to me that dismissing those who vote for it as stupid because it's a decision I disagree with is highly questionable.
Nobody is dismissing the people who voted Brexit as stupid, just that they got the decision wrong.
-
No, you haven't made any arguments.
Yes he has. You ignored them.
You've just asserted that people who voted for Brexit are stupid, and quoted Heinlein in a self aggrandising manner.
He did neither of those things.
Go back and read his posts, this time for comprehension.
-
Yes he has. You ignored them.
He did neither of those things.
Go back and read his posts, this time for comprehension.
Oh look more assertions. I read the Heinlein and his use of it as self aggrandising. It reads as if it claims he's in the top 5% of what he thinks of as thinking to me. Why do you disagree?
-
He clearly is one of the 5% that can think and do, as am I and as are you. I don't really think it is narcissistic to have a realistic opinion on some ability you might have.
I don't think Heinlein is 100% right. I think the 5% varies depending on the subject.
Nobody is dismissing the people who voted Brexit as stupid, just that they got the decision wrong.
Is there a 5% like that? You, Stranger, and Heinlein might agree and get all excited about your being in it but it's not a fact. It reads more like some pseudo-intellectual wanking.
-
Murdoch's Sun newspaper backs Labour in UK election (https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uks-sun-newspaper-backs-labour-one-day-before-election-2024-07-03/). :o
-
Murdoch's Sun newspaper backs Labour in UK election (https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uks-sun-newspaper-backs-labour-one-day-before-election-2024-07-03/). :o
Is it a surprise? It's not so much the Sun wot won it more it likes to be on the winning side.
-
Oh look more assertions.
No, advice to read the posts you are commenting on. Because you clearly didn't understand them the first time. This is evidenced by you levelling unfounded accusations at The Stranger.
I read the Heinlein and his use of it as self aggrandising. It reads as if it claims he's in the top 5% of what he thinks of as thinking to me. Why do you disagree?
What do you even care if The Stranger comes across as self aggrandising? Why don't you read the points he makes and respond to them instead of throwing insults around?
-
No, advice to read the posts you are commenting on. Because you clearly didn't understand them the first time. This is evidenced by you levelling unfounded accusations at The Stranger.
What do you even care if The Stranger comes across as self aggrandising? Why don't you read the points he makes and respond to them instead of throwing insults around?
And more assertions.
If you think saying you are right because you are intelligent is valuable, then I think it's worth pointing out that's a shite argument and opens you up to a bit of mockery.
-
Murdoch's Sun newspaper backs Labour in UK election (https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uks-sun-newspaper-backs-labour-one-day-before-election-2024-07-03/). :o
The Sun always backs whichever party is most likely to win, so that when they do win, they can say "It was the Sun wot won it".
-
The Sun always backs whichever party is most likely to win, so that when they do win, they can say "It was the Sun wot won it".
Pathetic really - they've actually always been followers rather than leaders, but to jump to supporting Labour literally on the eve of the election really is taking the mickey.
Not that newspapers have the influence they had - and even decades ago they thought they were more important than they actually were.
-
Vote Reform, the party that can bring the dead back to life.
-
And more assertions.
I gave you the evidence. Not just assertions.
If you think saying you are right because you are intelligent is valuable, then I think it's worth pointing out that's a shite argument and opens you up to a bit of mockery.
I think you need to start reading what other people actually write and stop responding to what your misunderstandings of their posts.
-
I think you need to start reading what other people actually write and stop responding to what your misunderstandings of their posts.
Yup - I agree - he does. And he also needs to stop misrepresenting folk here by claiming that nuanced comments are black/white.
-
Anyone planning to do an all-nighter in front of the telly tonight? I'm going to try, though in the end I might go to bed by 3-4 am, by which time the result should be clear.
-
Anyone planning to do an all-nighter in front of the telly tonight? I'm going to try, though in the end I might go to bed by 3-4 am, by which time the result should be clear.
I think I'll go to bed about 11.30 but get back up around the time you are thinking of going to bed.
-
Anyone planning to do an all-nighter in front of the telly tonight? I'm going to try, though in the end I might go to bed by 3-4 am, by which time the result should be clear.
Yup - although like you I doubt I'll be up all night - those days are long gone.
My son is coming down from Derby for the weekend and will join me. So probably mid evening meal, finish in time for exit poll. Couple of hours in the pub and then back home for when the results start to kick in in earnest.
-
Amongst fierce competition James O'Brien chooses this as the stupidest statement of the election.
https://youtube.com/shorts/puP17Jy9Gmk?si=v7Z_qMyj0wjrZI7Z
-
I shall go to bed at my usual time 8.30pm. I have to get up before 6am, and will put on the news then, as I usually do.
-
Doesn't feel like '97 which I did stay up for.
-
Anyone planning to do an all-nighter in front of the telly tonight? I'm going to try, though in the end I might go to bed by 3-4 am, by which time the result should be clear.
Yes me, although I may get distracted by other things and will probably end up going to bed around 3.
Edit: Just remembered I need to get up tomorrow around 5.30am, so maybe go to bed a little earlier.
-
This is disappointing (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cn09xn9je7lt?post=asset%3Ad6246313-f73a-42a6-9a1c-188909ea2a00#post).
-
This is disappointing (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cn09xn9je7lt?post=asset%3Ad6246313-f73a-42a6-9a1c-188909ea2a00#post).
I saw this too and yes I agree - not a good look from someone who presumably is considered a role model for many young people.
-
Doesn't feel like '97 which I did stay up for.
It is different.
There is certainly less optimism over a Labour victory than there was in 97. But the flip side is I think the current tories are despised to a much greater extent than Major's lot were in 97.
And in a way it may be a lot more fun as I think there may be far more 'Portillo' moments tonight with high profile tories kicked out than there were in 97.
-
https://x.com/DobbersW/status/1808739166953336867
-
I saw this too and yes I agree - not a good luck from someone who presumably is considered a role model for many young people.
I agree. Four of our five grandchildren are now of voting age, I hope they have cast their votes. One of them is in the US at present, so I hope he sorted out a postal vote before he went.
-
I agree. Four of our five grandchildren are now of voting age, I hope they have cast their votes. One of them is in the US at present, so I hope he sorted out a postal vote before he went.
Two of my three kids are of voting age - they've both voted and both by post. One was slightly concerned about when the postal vote would arrive as he headed off to the US last week for the summer. My elder son has voted by post in Derby (an actual marginal) and is coming home this evening to watch the results.
Despite the media view that young people don't vote and old people do the difference in turnout between 18-24 year-olds and over 65s has been reducing over the past few general elections.
-
So I hope Emma Radacanu loses every game she ever plays.
I didn't know it was the election today. She said.
Fuck me I said. There has been an earthquake from all the suffragettes turning in their graves.
Stupid little child.
-
Good advice
-
Exit poll prediction:
-
First result in Sunderland quite depressing. Turn out 51%, Reform in 2nd with twice as many votes as rhe Tories.
-
Three results so far, all Labour holds, and in all of them Reform pushed the Tories into third place.
-
It's two o'clock, Labour has 13 seats and the Tories and Lib Dems one each, and I'm off to bed.
-
It's two o'clock, Labour has 13 seats and the Tories and Lib Dems one each, and I'm off to bed.
And I got up just in time to see Lee Anderson win for Reform. Fuck!
-
Galloway loses, and Neil Kinnock speaks for me in calling him a repulsive chancer
-
Starmer wins, but reduced majority, with big vote for Andrew Feinstein, independent socialist with big concentration on Gaza.
-
Grant Shapps out.
-
Iain Duncan Smith survives after Faiza Shaheen splits the vote for Labour standing as independent.
-
I think I'll go back to bed before Farage wins.
-
Hooray! David Taylor wins for Labour in Hemel Hempstead!
-
Iain Duncan Smith survives after Faiza Shaheen splits the vote for Labour standing as independent.
Damn!
-
Truss is out! ;D ;D ;D
In ither news, the Greens have won four after all. That was what was predicted in advance, but earlier in the night, they were predicting two.
-
A BBC subtitle has just said that the Lib Dems have won their most seats since 1923. The Lib Dems didn't exist in 1923!
-
Jacob Ree-Smug is out! ;D ;D ;D
-
Fantastic night, nationally and locally. I'm off to bed for a few more hours.
-
Fantastic night, nationally and locally. I'm off to bed for a few more hours.
Some cheering results, a particular laugh at Douglas Ross losing, but while I hope things can only get better, the success of Reform is more of a N:ightmare.
-
Two thirds of the seats for one third of the vote.
-
2% more of the vote for Reform gets 4 seats as opposed 71 for Lib Dems.
-
Sinn Fein biggest party in Northern Ireland, and Ian Paisley Jnr loses his seat.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8978z7z8w4o
-
Apart from Penny Morduant dropping down for obvious reasons, not huge changes on Tory leadership. Mel Stride shortened a bit to 22s from 150.
-
Not really sure why Alba stood in Scotland in the General but look stuffed now.
ETA - worth noting that in Alloa and Grangemouth, a new seat, Alba under their Deputy Leader, Kenny MacAskill standing on a specific local issue, finished 8th, and was beaten by an independent, Eva Comrie, who used to be in Alba.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/uk/constituencies/S14000064
-
Two thirds of the seats for one third of the vote.
Whiilst I am pleased that Labour won (naturally) it does make a mockery of the phrase "representative democracy".
-
Whiilst I am pleased that Labour won (naturally) it does make a mockery of the phrase "representative democracy".
I'm not sure there's ever been a majority on a share of vote that small, never mind a landslide.
I'll be interested in the total votes, and what that would compare with historically.
ETA: in 2005 which is closest 35.2% got 66 seats majority, in 2015 Cameron got 36.8, and a majority of 12. 1922 38.4 for Tories got a majority of 79.
Nothing really close.
-
Discussions on Shadow Cabinet highlighted the Leicester South result where Shockat Ali won as an independent highlighting Gaza against Jonathan Ashworth.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leicester_South_(UK_Parliament_constituency) (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leicester_South_(UK_Parliament_constituency))
-
No Tories in Wales.
-
Whiilst I am pleased that Labour won (naturally) it does make a mockery of the phrase "representative democracy".
Agreed. Some kind of hybrid system would be good with PR but you'd still have constituencies. I like the idea of an MP being voted to represent a certain area. The only thing FPTP has is that it's simple.
-
Agreed. Some kind of hybrid system would be good with PR but you'd still have constituencies. I like the idea of an MP being voted to represent a certain area. The only thing FPTP has is that it's simple.
Single Transferable Vote does that.
-
Single Transferable Vote does that.
That's more or less what we have here in Finland.
-
;D ;D ;D
-
Incredible targeting of seats by both Labour and LibDems.
Absolutely disastrous night for the SNP - the result was at the very bottom level of expectations from the polling.
-
Incredible targeting of seats by both Labour and LibDems.
Absolutely disastrous night for the SNP - the result was at the very bottom level of expectations from the polling.
Helped enormously by Reform. Celebrating the results of FPTP as being really cunning is in this case simplistic.
-
Be very interested to see the total votes for the Tories and how that looks historically. A low turnout and a historically low % share...
Labour less votes than 2019...
The Tories have not just broken themselves but have created real democratic failings. Perhaps repairing that would be Starmer's greatest achievement.
-
Labour less votes than 2019...
Hence my point about targeting seats.
-
Hence my point about targeting seats.
Which would then seen to imply that Reform was just a conspiracy by Labour and Lid Dems. The Tories list this by screwing up the UK so badly. There may be twenty seats overall where really good targeting made a difference but claiming it as about that as opposed to Johnson, Partyfate, Truss, and Reform is merely mythicising.
-
There may be twenty seats overall where really good targeting made a difference ...
Laughable - the results in seat after seat showed one or other of Labour or LibDem having a huge swing to them, while the other had vote which remained flat or even declined. The story of this election will be tactical voting between Labour and LibDem to take seats from the tories.
Somewhat naive to imply that Reform only took tory votes - the polls leading up to yesterday don't back this up at all. The surge in Reform polling was matched by pretty similar drops in both tory and labour shares.
-
Laughable - the results in seat after seat showed one or other of Labour or LibDem having a huge swing to them, while the other had vote which remained flat or even declined. The story of this election will be tactical voting between Labour and LibDem to take seats from the tories.
Somewhat naive to imply that Reform only took tory votes - the polls leading up to yesterday don't back this up at all. The surge in Reform polling was matched by pretty similar drops in both tory and labour shares.
That there was tactical voting does not mean it was all done by the parties targeting, rather people fed up with the Tories are capable of thinking for themselves. The reform vote had more effect in Tory spaces. The Labout vote is down on 2019. The system is way more broken than Labour and Lib Dems targeting seats.
-
Laughable - the results in seat after seat showed one or other of Labour or LibDem having a huge swing to them, while the other had vote which remained flat or even declined. The story of this election will be tactical voting between Labour and LibDem to take seats from the tories.
Somewhat naive to imply that Reform only took tory votes - the polls leading up to yesterday don't back this up at all. The surge in Reform polling was matched by pretty similar drops in both tory and labour shares.
Yes, i agree both Labour and the Lib-Dems benefitted from tactical voting, but whether it was by "incredible targeting" is doubtful. I think there was an overwhelming feeling of "get the Tories out" to the point that there were web sites set up that would tell you how to vote to make sure the Tories doidn't get in, and targeting by the parties wasn't required.
Where did the "get the Tories out" sentiment come from? From all the personalities and scandals that NS listed - and more.
-
Yes, i agree both Labour and the Lib-Dems benefitted from tactical voting, but whether it was by "incredible targeting" is doubtful. I think there was an overwhelming feeling of "get the Tories out" to the point that there were web sites set up that would tell you how to vote to make sure the Tories doidn't get in, and targeting by the parties wasn't required.
Where did the "get the Tories out" sentiment come from? From all the personalities and scandals that NS listed - and more.
Add to that the big number is the Tory share of vote 44% to 24%.
-
Leaving aside specific considerations about the result, I hope that Starmer is lucky as well as a winner. The system feels broken onany levels. I worried for the Tory Party - not something I've written before but it's lost a lot of people through the result and the retirements. At 120 it's going to need to redefine itself almost entirely while Farage gloats in waiting.
The effect of Johnson's premiership is deep, and public life I'm Britiain seems as dark as I can remember.
So good luck, Mr Starmer.
-
That there was tactical voting does not mean it was all done by the parties targeting, rather people fed up with the Tories are capable of thinking for themselves.
Disagree - sure there were sites that helpfully indicated where to place tactical votes to get rid of the tories, but these weren't just based on polling (which was pretty tricky to unpack) but also on quietly released information from the parties themselves. Where I live Labour were no-where (despite having held the seat as recently as 2005) - the LibDems campaigned clearly on documents from Labour indicating it not to be a target seat. LibDem efforts went in in my seat. The next door seats, both west and east were Labour targets (they gained them both) - SteveH will tell us how much presence and activity there was from Labour compared to LibDems there.
Just look at the 3 neighbouring seats to me - all gains, 2 Labour one LibDem - Hemel, Hatfield and Harpenden. Where the LibDems were targeting the Labour vote went down, where Labour were targeting the LibDem vote barely shifted or went down.
That's what targeting is all about.
-
Disagree - sure there were sites that helpfully indicated where to place tactical votes to get rid of the tories, but these weren't just based on polling (which was pretty tricky to unpack) but also on quietly released information from the parties themselves. Where I live Labour were no-where (despite having held the seat as recently as 2005) - the LibDems campaigned clearly on documents from Labour indicating it not to be a target seat. LibDem efforts went in in my seat. The next door seats, both west and east were Labour targets (they gained them both) - SteveH will tell us how much presence and activity there was from Labour compared to LibDems there.
Just look at the 3 neighbouring seats to me - all gains, 2 Labour one LibDem - Hemel, Hatfield and Harpenden. Where the LibDems were targeting the Labour vote went down, where Labour were targeting the LibDem vote barely shifted or went down.
That's what targeting is all about.
And has very little comparative effect on votes. The big number as already covered is the 44% that 25% of market share.
-
So Union Jacks, and Welsh flags, and Saltires on Starmer's procession up Downing St but no St George's Crosses that I can see.
Obviously viewers in Northern Ireland have their own programme.
-
And has very little comparative effect on votes. The big number as already covered is the 44% that 25% of market share.
Again I disagree - there would have been loads more seats that would have remained tory, even with a a drop to 25% of the vote if Labour/LibDem opposition had been split on a more uniform swing basis allowing the tories to just hold on.
It really is very, very hard to argue that there wasn't incredibly efficient targeting on the basis of Labour getting 412 seat (up 211) on just 33% of the vote, and the LibDems getting 71 seats on a vote share barely different to 2019.
Effectively Labour and the LibDems didn't go against each other in trying to oust the tories in individual seats - it was a case of 'after you' in some seats and 'no after you' in others.
Just think about the campaign - I can hardly think of a single point in which Labour attacked the LibDems or vice versa.
-
Again I disagree - there would have been loads more seats that would have remained tory, even with a a drop to 25% of the vote if Labour/LibDem opposition had been split on a more uniform swing basis allowing the tories to just hold on.
It really is very, very hard to argue that there wasn't incredibly efficient targeting on the basis of Labour getting 412 seat (up 211) on just 33% of the vote, and the LibDems getting 71 seats on a vote share barely different to 2019.
Effectively Labour and the LibDems didn't go against each other in trying to oust the tories in individual seats - it was a case of 'after you' in some seats and 'no after you' in others.
Just think about the campaign - I can hardly think of a single point in which Labour attacked the LibDems or vice versa.
And focusing resources is fine. It's not what caused the result. And has Reform not stood, it would have been very different.
-
Not bad speech, but as it said deeds rather than words so we need to see what happens next.
-
NS - I note you have quietly side stepped my comment on how disastrous the SNP's night was - arguably far worse than for the tories.
The tories lost 67% of their seats, but the SNP have lost (one seat to go) pretty well 80% of their seats.
-
NS - I note you have quietly side stepped my comment on how disastrous the SNP's night was - arguably far worse than for the tories.
The tories lost 67% of their seats, but the SNP have lost (one seat to go) pretty well 80% of their seats.
No, it just wasn't relevant to the point. I'm surprised that the vote held up to 30%. I was hoping it would fall lower. I did like SNP beating Douglas Ross but that was because it was Douglas Ross.
I'd be hoping thar the Lib Dems get the Inverness Skye and Ross shire seat as a nod to Charles Kennedy as far as the redrawn ones go.
-
Jeremy Hunt zooming up the Tory leader odds
-
Hmm...
2017 - Corbyn - 12,877,918 votes - 260 MPs
2019 - Corbyn - 10,269,051 votes - 202 MPs
2024 - Starmer - 9,686,329 votes - 412 MPs
-
Just to illustrate my point about the incredible level of targeting and efficiency of the Labour and LibDem votes, if you take the vote share from last night and assume a uniform national swing - i.e. no targeting, you get the following seat prediction.
Labour 297
Con 243
LD 32
SNP 53
So the targeting and efficiency of voting more than doubled LD seats, increased Labour seats by 40% while halving the tories seats ... and let's no go there on the SNP.
-
Just to illustrate my point about the incredible level of targeting and efficiency of the Labour and LibDem votes, if you take the vote share from last night and assume a uniform national swing - i.e. no targeting, you get the following seat prediction.
Labour 297
Con 243
LD 32
SNP 53
So the targeting and efficiency of voting more than doubled LD seats, increased Labour seats by 40% while halving the tories seats ... and let's no go there on the SNP.
Yes, let's not go there on the SNP seats since that seems to be assuming that they are standing in England and Wales in some weird way, or something just odd
ETA 30% of the votes aren't going to get you 53 of 57 seats in Scotland. And not sure what you would be applying elsewhere so that can't be right either. Do you mean 23?
-
Hmm...
2017 - Corbyn - 12,877,918 votes - 260 MPs
2019 - Corbyn - 10,269,051 votes - 202 MPs
2024 - Starmer - 9,686,329 votes - 412 MPs
I'm not really sure what your point is - whether or not you agree with it, we currently have a FPTP system and you you win or lose an election on the basis of those rules. And Corbyn lost in 2017 and lost again 2019. And you also can't really criticise a party if they look at the rules and decide to run a campaign on the basis of doing the best they could do under those rule (which is exactly what Labour and the LibDems did last night - see my previous post on targeting and efficiency of vote for them).
If you don't like the rules (I don't and I voted for AV in the referendum) then you should campaign to change them. What I find really disingenuous is a whole pile of tories who suddenly think FPTP is unfair, but were perfectly happy with it when it resulted in tory victories on a third of the vote.
-
Yes, let's not go there on the SNP seats since that seems to be assuming that they are standing in England and Wales in some weird way.
No it doesn't - it assumes a UK wide level of swing occurred to the same degree in every constituency.
-
I'm not really sure what your point is - whether or not you agree with it, we currently have a FPTP system and you you win or lose an election on the basis of those rules. And Corbyn lost in 2017 and lost again 2019. And you also can't really criticise a party if they look at the rules and decide to run a campaign on the basis of doing the best they could do under those rule (which is exactly what Labour and the LibDems did last night - see my previous post on targeting and efficiency of vote for them).
If you don't like the rules (I don't and I voted for AV in the referendum) then you should campaign to change them. What I find really disingenuous is a whole pile of tories who suddenly think FPTP is unfair, but were perfectly happy with it when it resulted in tory victories on a third of the vote.
The point is there is a democratic deficit and those numbers don't show a coming together of the country. I've campaigned for PR all my adult life so I agree with the talk of disingenuous by some though it's irrelevant to whether there is an issue.
-
No it doesn't - it assumes a UK wide level of swing occurred to the same degree in every constituency.
See what I added. There are 57 seats in Scotland how do the SNP get 53 on 30% of the vote? Did you mean 23? Or something else?
-
The point is there is a democratic deficit and those numbers don't show a coming together of the country. I've campaigned for PR all my adult life so I agree with the talk of disingenuous by some though it's irrelevant to whether there is an issue.
I agree - you can't just decide you like a system when you win under it and then decide it is unfair when you lose under it.
But you also cannot just look at result under FPTP and presume what that would be under PR - because if we had PR we would likely have more and different parties and people wouldn't vote in the same way that they do under FPTP.
It will be interesting to see whether yesterday's result drives a ground swell of support for a change in the voting system. And whether that will gain traction in the various parties.
-
See what I added. There are 57 seats in Scotland how do the SNP get 53 on 30% of the vote? Did you mean 23? Or something else?
The data come from here.
https://x.com/Dylan_Difford/status/1809141596216087018
See comments on Scotland.
It is perfectly possible to win 53 seats, or even 57 seats on 30% of the vote - it just requires all the other parties to vote slightly less than you.
-
I agree - you can't just decide you like a system when you win under it and then decide it is unfair when you lose under it.
But you also cannot just look at result under FPTP and presume what that would be under PR - because if we had PR we would likely have more and different parties and people wouldn't vote in the same way that they do under FPTP.
It will be interesting to see whether yesterday's result drives a ground swell of support for a change in the voting system. And whether that will gain traction in the various parties.
People get to change their minds. I've known lots of people who see a result and rethink.
The point that you ignored is that the Labour vote is not about a vote FOR change, or a coming together of the country.
I doubt the Labour Party are going to want to fiddle about with the voting system.
-
And this on Labour's targeting and efficiency of the vote.
https://x.com/mattholehouse/status/1809118506450911731/photo/1
So Labour's result last night is the most efficient by any party in any general election since 1983 (and I image well before that too although the data only goes back to 83).
-
The point that you ignored is that the Labour vote is not about a vote FOR change, or a coming together of the country.
We cannot judge that yet - we will see whether this is the case in the months and years ahead.
But specifically on 'coming together of the country' - for the first time in a very, very long time we will have a governing party in Westminster that won the general election not just across the UK, but also won the election in England, and in Scotland and in Wales.
-
The data come from here.
https://x.com/Dylan_Difford/status/1809141596216087018
See comments on Scotland.
It is perfectly possible to win 53 seats, or even 57 seats on 30% of the vote - it just requires all the other parties to vote slightly less than you.
I think that's then using a set of figures which doesn't illustrate your point bur rather an issue about the idea of universal swing. Otherwise you would seem to have suggested that the SNP should be disappointed not getting 53 seats out of 57 on 30% of the vote.
I'd also like to see how if the Labour Party get 36% I'm those seats it's possible for that split to happen.
You also haven't by using the figures shown any connection between thar it was all down to targeting, and not people voting Tories put, or voting for Reform.
-
We cannot judge that yet - we will see whether this is the case in the months and years ahead.
But specifically on 'coming together of the country' - for the first time in a very, very long time we will have a governing party in Westminster that won the general election not just across the UK, but also have the largest number of seats in England, and in Scotland and in Wales.
On just over a third of the vote but you seem to be cheering that today which seems exactly as disingenuous as a Tory new recruit to PR.
-
I'd also like to see how if the Labour Party get 36% I'm those seats it's possible for that split to happen.
Because in Scotland in 2019 Labour got just 18% of the vote and if you then apply a UNS on change in UK vote share from 2019-2024, that is just +1.6% for Labour so they'd end up with a ~20% vote share in Scotland.
-
Because in Scotland in 2019 Labour got just 18% of the vote and if you then apply a UNS on change in UK vote share from 2019-2024, that is just +1.6% for Labour so they'd end up with a ~20% vote share in Scotland.
So you are suggesting that the 16% of the Labour Party swing was to do with 'targetting'? Very funny. Anyway let's agree to hope for a better outcome than the last years, and I'll buy you and Starmer a virtual drink of good luck.
-
If Starmer meant and acts upon what he said in his speech to the nation, after being formerly declared Prime Minister by The King, he is the right man for the job.
-
If Starmer meant and acts upon what he said in his speech to the nation, after being formerly declared Prime Minister by The King, he is the right man for the job.
I don't disagree but most of the leaders of main parties might well have said similarly and to act similarly. Indeed, I'm pretty sure Sunak said many of the same things, and leaving aside the distraction of Rwanda used to deal with the bogeyman of Reform, would not really have been trying much different.
He needs luck. He needs some patience from the electorate as nothing is a quick change. I will say that during all of the talk of volatility in the electorate it may give him sometime since the volatility was after the worst govt my life, and 14 years of Tory govt.
I hope that the large majority might allow them to reach put a bit. I wouldn't mind if they appointed Ed Davey onto care in some way. I think they should look at getting agreement with other parties on a way of working with Europe, and they could look to doing some working together on the constitution with the other parties. It might well be worth looking at how England gets represented in terms of a reformed devolved settlement which might address some of the Reform voters concerned, and that might include a loom at voting.
I'd also talk to the opposition parties about how the parliament works with PM questions, committees, work structure. As a small point, I'd have all the subsidy on drinks, and tl an extent food, in the HoP removed.
-
The most disproportionate election ever - though not for the Lib Dems.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c886pl6ldy9o
-
Neil Kinnock on Galloway from this morning
https://twitter.com/willblackwriter/status/1809201830942978364
-
5th MP for Reform
-
Diane Abbott 'Mother of the House'
-
No, it just wasn't relevant to the point. I'm surprised that the vote held up to 30%. I was hoping it would fall lower. I did like SNP beating Douglas Ross but that was because it was Douglas Ross.
I'd be hoping thar the Lib Dems get the Inverness Skye and Ross shire seat as a nod to Charles Kennedy as far as the redrawn ones go.
And looks as if they will get it.
-
Missed that Mickey Fab the great DJ created by Simon Hoggart has gone.
https://www.itv.com/news/central/2024-07-05/mp-michael-fabricant-loses-lichfield-seat-he-has-held-since-1992
https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2009/feb/14/simon-hoggarts-week
-
.
-
The 'Father of the House' asks Farage to join the Tories
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c720w4pze28o
-
Anyone else noticed the resemblance between Rachel Reeves and the late Australian singer, Judith Durham?
-
Anyone else noticed the resemblance between Rachel Reeves and the late Australian singer, Judith Durham?
Not really, no.
-
Anyone else noticed the resemblance between Rachel Reeves and the late Australian singer, Judith Durham?
Yes, me...and finally, the carnival IS over.
-
West Worthing where I live evicted the Father of the House, Peter Bottomley and elected Dr Beccy Cooper who is lovely - I met her some weeks ago.
My personal favourite eviction though was Ben Bradley in Mansfield (Notts) my hometown. He is a useless, lying, lickspittle and Mansfield deserves better.
The democratic deficit is clear for all to see with Labour getting a huge majority on a 34% share of the vote. As a long-time proponent of PR, I find myself embarrassingly conflicted on the matter due to the maggot-infected nature of Reform. Do I want their voice amplified to such a degree that their disgusting views get more exposure and acceptance within society? The hope would be, of course, that such exposure would ensure greater scrutiny.
Hmmm....how's that going in Europe?
So, I find myself in an unusual (for me), state of dither, concerning PR.
-
Yes, unsavoury groups like Reform would do better under PR- but that's democracy for you. Apparently, only two countries in Europe still use FPTP, the other being Belarus - not good company to keep. Some forms of PR would be even worse than FPTP:; what we need is single transferable vote PR..
-
Fair dos to Sunak - he gave a generous resignation speech, with some kind words about Sir Keir. "Nothing in his premiership became him like the leaving it", to slightly misquote Shakespeare.
-
Fair dos to Sunak - he gave a generous resignation speech, with some kind words about Sir Keir. "Nothing in his premiership became him like the leaving it", to slightly misquote Shakespeare.
Despite some fratchety stuff in the debates, I don't think they dislike one and other, unlike Starmer and Johnson.
-
Yes, unsavoury groups like Reform would do better under PR- but that's democracy for you. Apparently, only two countries in Europe still use FPTP, the other being Belarus - not good company to keep. Some forms of PR would be even worse than FPTP:; what we need is single transferable vote PR..
STV not used in the European elections when we had them on the mainland, but was used in NI,, which used D'Hondt and closed list, and arguably led to Brexit via the 2014 election.
FPTP has also given us Trump. I think you need a veil of ignorance about actual results in deciding what you think is a decent system. Once you start choosing the system to stop specific people you are the people that should be stopped.
-
Fair dos to Sunak - he gave a generous resignation speech, with some kind words about Sir Keir. "Nothing in his premiership became him like the leaving it", to slightly misquote Shakespeare.
I agree. I wonder who will replace Sunak?
-
I agree. I wonder who will replace Sunak?
Current odds
-
Just to illustrate my point about the incredible level of targeting and efficiency of the Labour and LibDem votes, if you take the vote share from last night and assume a uniform national swing - i.e. no targeting, you get the following seat prediction.
Labour 297
Con 243
LD 32
SNP 53
So the targeting and efficiency of voting more than doubled LD seats, increased Labour seats by 40% while halving the tories seats ... and let's no go there on the SNP.
Where does Refirm UK Ltd factor in to your argument. Because it probably split the Tory vote in a lot of places.
-
Yes, me...and finally, the carnival IS over.
It certainly is for JD, who snuffed it in 2022, aged 79.
-
Good appointment on prisons from Starmer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp08y5p52e2o
-
Good appointment on prisons from Starmer
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp08y5p52e2o
Well, let’s see how he does.
-
A Fysh out of water
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3ge4kd8kl9o
-
Well, let’s see how he does.
Indeed but appts can be good and bad at the time they are made even without hindsight. Had he appointed Farage, I think it's justifiable to call it a bad appointment.
Timpson has an interest in this and has in my mind dine more for rehabilitation than any prison minister in my memory. Blunkett is right to warn about the difficulties of getting things down but let us hope that one thing he gets undone quickly is one of Blunkett's openly admitted errors
https://www.theguardian.com/film/article/2024/jun/12/britains-forgotten-prisoners-documentary-martin-read-ipp
I also thunk it's a good appointment in that it looks out of the usual turn of MPs with little knowledge on a subject. It highlights an issue of govt that in order to do it Timpson has to go to the HoL, which continues to expand.
-
While some have worried in the past about the Ulsterisation of Scottish politics, is there a Palestinianisation of UK, and Labour, politics?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3g37mk7vxlo
-
Indeed but appts can be good and bad at the time they are made even without hindsight. Had he appointed Farage, I think it's justifiable to call it a bad appointment.
Timpson has an interest in this and has in my mind dine more for rehabilitation than any prison minister in my memory. Blunkett is right to warn about the difficulties of getting things down but let us hope that one thing he gets undone quickly is one of Blunkett's openly admitted errors
https://www.theguardian.com/film/article/2024/jun/12/britains-forgotten-prisoners-documentary-martin-read-ipp
I also thunk it's a good appointment in that it looks out of the usual turn of MPs with little knowledge on a subject. It highlights an issue of govt that in order to do it Timpson has to go to the HoL, which continues to expand.
I agree his CV looks good but this is a political position. He might not be able to work within the constraints. I think promising is a better word than good here.
-
I agree his CV looks good but this is a political position. He might not be able to work within the constraints. I think promising is a better word than good here.
Because the politicians working on prisons have been so effective. If you need hindsight to judge a decision as being good decision, you cannot make a decision.
-
Because the politicians working on prisons have been so effective. If you need hindsight to judge a decision as being good decision, you cannot make a decision.
Guess what. Whenever you employ anybody for any job, you can’t tell if the decision is a good decision until they have been doing it for a while. Any employment decision is just an educated guess.
Welcome to the real world.
-
Guess what. Whenever you employ anybody for any job, you can’t tell if the decision is a good decision until they have been doing it for a while. Any employment decision is just an educated guess.
Welcome to the real world.
It's the educated bit that's good.
-
I've long thought that the House of Lords should be abolished, and replaced (if at all) by a directly-elected body of fixed size. However, I must admit that the appointment of James Timpson as prisons minister, via a peerage, suggests at least one argument in favour of the present system: it allows the PM to appoint people with relevant experience from outside politics to ministerial posts. Maybe we could have a directly-elected second chamber of fixed size, plus a small number (say three max) of places for appointed ministers.
-
I've long thought that the House of Lords should be abolished, and replaced (if at all) by a directly-elected body of fixed size. However, I must admit that the appointment of James Timpson as prisons minister, via a peerage, suggests at least one argument in favour of the present system: it allows the PM to appoint people with relevant experience from outside politics to ministerial posts. Maybe we could have a directly-elected second chamber of fixed size, plus a small number (say three max) of places for appointed ministers.
Don't disagree, though to an extent I thought when they came up with the idea of 'czars', it was to give ministerial authority in areas but not involve them in cabinet.
-
Tory Shadow Cabinet...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13613245/Rishi-Sunak-shadow-Cabinet-Tory-chair-Ric-Holden-Lord-Cameron-quit-election.html
-
'Levelling up phrase to be erased, says minister' - while I agree with this, I can also see the significance in having the aim in the name, just perhaps not quite such an empty one.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0veqgr7lw4o
-
Tory Shadow Cabinet...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13613245/Rishi-Sunak-shadow-Cabinet-Tory-chair-Ric-Holden-Lord-Cameron-quit-election.html
And as usual, the right wing thinks they lost because the party was not right wing enough. The same thing tends to happen with Labour after they lose big but in the left wing direction.
-
And as usual, the right wing thinks they lost because the party was not right wing enough. The same thing tends to happen with Labour after they lose big but in the left wing direction.
There's a certain irony that more so than being in the EU, it was the leaving of it that has ruined them.
Johnson managed to keep the right wing happy with no real effort in terms of actions, after all why change the habit of a lifetime. Since that the spat they are now having was happening in govt, they now have that concentrated by the loss of seats. If I were 'Suicide Sunak', I would be off since half of them at least appear to hate him.
-
I've long thought that the House of Lords should be abolished, and replaced (if at all) by a directly-elected body of fixed size. However, I must admit that the appointment of James Timpson as prisons minister, via a peerage, suggests at least one argument in favour of the present system: it allows the PM to appoint people with relevant experience from outside politics to ministerial posts. Maybe we could have a directly-elected second chamber of fixed size, plus a small number (say three max) of places for appointed ministers.
You are correct that the current second chamber structure allows governments to bring in specific expertise to ministerial posts, and any revised chamber should probably allow something similar I guess.
However I'm not sure it is necessary to have people in ministerial posts - it is perfectly possible to appoint a range of expert advisors without having to make them ministers, nor to elevate them to the second chamber.
There is also a risk - that someone with a particular expertise, and potentially a commitment to a particular policy position, may not actually understand the role of a minister, nor the levers that need to be pulled within government, parliament and the civil service to get things done. There have been previous examples where similar appointments haven't worked because the individual in question rather expected their 'pet' policy simply to be implemented, but sometimes things are more tricky than that!!
So actually I'm more positive towards Vallance's appointment than Timpson. This is for a number of reasons.
First Vallance was Chief Scientific Officer so he will understand how Whitehall and Westminster work.
Secondly science is an area where government's tend to operate at arms length, via funding priorities, regulation etc rather than directly. This, I think is a better fit for an 'outsider'.
Finally, I have a bit of a concern that Timpson's policy interests are a bit narrow - his focus has been largely on providing employment for ex-offenders. Not I'm not dismissing that this is really important - it is. But the role of a prison's minister is surely much broader than this and I'd want to be confident that he is interested in the entirety of his brief, not his (albeit very important) 'pet' policy.
-
Don't disagree, though to an extent I thought when they came up with the idea of 'czars', it was to give ministerial authority in areas but not involve them in cabinet.
I think you are misunderstanding government.
Not all ministers are in the cabinet - only the most senior ones. So-called policy czars weren't appointed as ministers at all - they were experts that worked alongside and advised ministers due to their specific expertise and commitment to a specific policy area
-
'Levelling up phrase to be erased, says minister' - while I agree with this, I can also see the significance in having the aim in the name, just perhaps not quite such an empty one.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0veqgr7lw4o
Good - actually I thought as a phrase it was pretty good but it is now so tarnished by failure and associated with the incompetence and (frankly) corruption of the outgoing tory government it is very sensible that the new government has consigned it to the dustbin of history.
-
I think you are misunderstanding government.
Not all ministers are in the cabinet - only the most senior ones. So-called policy czars weren't appointed as ministers at all - they were experts that worked alongside and advised ministers due to their specific expertise and commitment to a specific policy area
I didn't say czars were ministers. Rather I was suggesting that they were used so that they didn't need to be in cabinet but could have similar authority in getting things done to ministers. Apologies for not being clear.
-
I didn't say czars were ministers. Rather I was suggesting that they were used so that they didn't need to be in cabinet but could have similar authority in getting things done to ministers. Apologies for not being clear.
Sorry you are still being unclear - you still seem to be implying that being a minister and being in cabinet are one and the same thing - they aren't.
-
Sorry you are still being unclear - you still seem to be implying that being a minister and being in cabinet are one and the same thing - they aren't.
Agree. Again apologies for being unclear.
-
Agree. Again apologies for being unclear.
Hmm - to err once is human - to err twice looks careless.
What is it exactly that you are trying to say about:
Cabinet ministers
Ministers who aren't in the cabinet
Policy czars
-
Hmm - to err once is human - to err twice looks careless.
What is it exactly that you are trying to say about:
Cabinet ministers
Ministers who aren't in the cabinet
Policy czars
Are you OK? I wrote something unclear. Thanks for help clearing it up.
-
Are you OK? I wrote something unclear. Thanks for help clearing it up.
I'm asking you what you meant to say (but without being unclear) - you haven't done so yet. All you've done is make two rather unclear comments where you seem to scramble the distinction between those in the cabinet, ministers (who may or may not be in the cabinet) and policy czars.
I'm trying to get you to explain your point in a manner that isn't completely unclear.
-
I'm asking you what you meant to say (but without being unclear) - you haven't done so yet. All you've done is make two rather unclear comments where you seem to scramble the distinction between those in the cabinet, ministers (who may or may not be in the cabinet) and policy czars.
I'm trying to get you to explain your point in a manner that isn't completely unclear.
And I think with my agreeing with your kind points, and you plugging that into the original comment it makes it clear, again, many thanks.
-
Watching the HoC after 14 years of Tory Govt, and after the huge change in seats, it feels very odd looking at the changed personnel and benches.
-
Hmm - to err once is human - to err twice looks careless.
Oh FFS. He's apologised twice. Let it go.
-
Oh FFS. He's apologised twice. Let it go.
He apologised for being unclear (when he was actually wrong), but then continues to be unclear (when he was actually continuing to be wrong).
When I picked him up on his comment that implied that ministers and cabinet ministers were one and the same (reply850) - he apologised but in the very same post made exactly the same claim (reply858). Surely you can understand my frustration, particularly with a poster who will jump upon the slightest lack of clarity and misrepresent it at the drop of a hat.
But actually my broader point is that NS seems (maybe - slightly unclear to me) have accepted that the cabinet are a subset of ministers and than policy czars are not ministers, but I still have no clue what point he was trying to make in his comment about czars, ministers and the cabinet.
-
And I think with my agreeing with your kind points, and you plugging that into the original comment it makes it clear, again, many thanks.
Nope - still have no idea what point you were trying to make in relation to policy czars and their interaction with ministers as a broad group and the subset of ministers that are in the cabinet.
I'd appreciate hearing your view on this matter as you haven't provided it yet with any clarity.
-
He apologised for being unclear (when he was actually wrong), but then continues to be unclear (when he was actually continuing to be wrong).
When I picked him up on his comment that implied that ministers and cabinet ministers were one and the same (reply850) - he apologised but in the very same post made exactly the same claim (reply858). Surely you can understand my frustration, particularly with a poster who will jump upon the slightest lack of clarity and misrepresent it at the drop of a hat.
I didn't bother to read any of that. I don't care.
But actually my broader point is that NS seems (maybe - slightly unclear to me) have accepted that the cabinet are a subset of ministers and than policy czars are not ministers, but I still have no clue what point he was trying to make in his comment about czars, ministers and the cabinet.
Actually, the broad point is how do you introduce domain experts into the government without them having to be elected to a constituency.
-
Actually, the broad point is how do you introduce domain experts into the government without them having to be elected to a constituency.
Indeed - and I think NS has a point about that but I have no idea what that point is as he hasn't articulated it in a manner that has any clarity, due to his repeated confusion between the cabinet, ministers in general, the government (which also includes the civil service) and so-called policy czars.
I'd like to hear his point, but he seems reluctant to make it clearly.
-
Fantastic graphic that demonstrates the phenomenal (and cooperative) targeting of seats by Labour and the LibDems
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1809633522115661993
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1809633522115661993/photo/1
There is an inflection point at which Labour vote share drops like a stone and at exactly the same point the LibDems suddenly rises. When Labour were targeting the LibDems simply didn't target and compete and vice versa.
If you check his feed you can see equivalent graphs for 2015
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1810652821840105685/photo/2
and 2017
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1810652821840105685/photo/3
you don't see the same effect - there is no sudden inflection point in Labour (or LibDem) vote share.
-
Fantastic graphic that demonstrates the phenomenal (and cooperative) targeting of seats by Labour and the LibDems
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1809633522115661993
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1809633522115661993/photo/1
There is an inflection point at which Labour vote share drops like a stone and at exactly the same point the LibDems suddenly rises. When Labour were targeting the LibDems simply didn't target and compete and vice versa.
If you check his feed you can see equivalent graphs for 2015
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1810652821840105685/photo/2
and 2017
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1810652821840105685/photo/3
you don't see the same effect - there is no sudden inflection point in Labour (or LibDem) vote share.
A very interesting set of graphs. I'd be interested to see the equivalent graphs for Conservatives and Reform UK Party ltd. My impression from this graph is that the proportion of votes taken by Reform UK Party ltd from the Tories is fairly constant.
-
A very interesting set of graphs. I'd be interested to see the equivalent graphs for Conservatives and Reform UK Party ltd. My impression from this graph is that the proportion of votes taken by Reform UK Party ltd from the Tories is fairly constant.
I'm not sure these graphs tell us about vote switching - there are other analyses that have done this. Merely the vote share in each seat ranked (in this case) by Labour vote.
-
A very interesting set of graphs. I'd be interested to see the equivalent graphs for Conservatives and Reform UK Party ltd. My impression from this graph is that the proportion of votes taken by Reform UK Party ltd from the Tories is fairly constant.
Ranked by tory vote share here:
https://x.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1809889955130273840/photo/3
-
The face of Reform - Ann "sour-faced old bigot" Widdecombe.