UK election 2024

[jeremyp]

..

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.

[Nearly Sane]

"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

[jeremyp]

"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.

[Nearly Sane]

It looks like fraud.

Jesus Christ, these people are morons.

Maybe he was going to use it to get Sunak SKY TV
 

[Maeght]

Sunak is astonishingly rich and privileged and comes across as ... err ... astonishingly rich and privileged.

So I guess there is a refreshing honesty

True 

[Nearly Sane]

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.

[Maeght]

Sunak getting tetchy again on Sky.

[Nearly Sane]

Sunak getting tetchy again on Sky.

I've sacrificed having it

[Nearly Sane]

.

[jeremyp]

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.

[SteveH]

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?

[jeremyp]

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.

[Nearly Sane]

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

[Nearly Sane]

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

[SteveH]

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.

[jeremyp]

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".

[jeremyp]

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.

[SteveH]

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.

[Nearly Sane]

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.

[ProfessorDavey]

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.

[Nearly Sane]

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

[ProfessorDavey]

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.

[Nearly Sane]

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 

[ProfessorDavey]

  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).

[Nearly Sane]

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.