General Election 2024

[Ralphw2]

I will probably go to sleep at eleven, after the exit polls have been discussed, then get woken at dawn by the dog at 5am as usual. Enough results will be declared by then to start gloating properly. My constituency is always slow to declare.

[Default0ptions]

It’s just such a shame that gloating is worthless in the currency of big money and government.

Sleep well

[UndercoverElephant]

Latest MRP-sort-of.

https://x.com/BritainElects/status/1804830183192428753

MODEL UPDATE | How would the UK vote if the election was held today?

LAB: 435 MPs (+235)
CON: 96 (-276)
LDEM: 63 (+55)
SNP: 24 (-24)
REF: 6 (+6)
GRN: 4 (+3)
PC: 3 (+1)

[clv101]

The betting thing is just ridiculous. It's so stupid it wouldn't be believable in a political drama, but here we are. Absolute idiots and for what? A few hundred, maybe a few thousand quid? It's not even like the millions involved in PPE scandal. These aren't life changing amounts of money for these people.

As to what comes next, Labour are going to have a horrible time these next five years. It will be very difficult for them to be regarded as a 'success' come the next election. Many of the challenges they and the country face are just beyond the scope of what Starmer's team can deal with given their degrees of freedom - and that's without any new shocks. The US election is also significant for the new Labour government - they'll find it difficult to work with Trump!

Given that Labour are likely to get the blame for the continuing decline of the UK come next election, the ground is ripe for the far right to rise up, history shows us this familiar pattern. A lot depends on what happens to what remains of the Tory Party, who will the new leader be? Will they move closer to reform or will the 'One Nation' conservatives make a come back (party hasn't done so well without them!)? It'll be fascinating to so see how the Tories respond to their drubbing.

I'll be going to bed as soon as the exit poll is announced and probably wake at 4ish for the fun.

[UndercoverElephant]

The betting thing is just ridiculous. It's so stupid it wouldn't be believable in a political drama, but here we are. Absolute idiots and for what? A few hundred, maybe a few thousand quid?

That would be if they got away with it. That it is pretty obvious that they weren't going to get away with it just makes it even more unbelievably stupid. It is the cherry on top of the most extraordinary trifle.

Given that Labour are likely to get the blame for the continuing decline of the UK come next election, the ground is ripe for the far right to rise up, history shows us this familiar pattern. A lot depends on what happens to what remains of the Tory Party, who will the new leader be?

Badenoch may turn out to be the only serious candidate who doesn't lose their seat. Enormous majority and no clear challenger.

Will they move closer to reform or will the 'One Nation' conservatives make a come back (party hasn't done so well without them!)? It'll be fascinating to so see how the Tories respond to their drubbing.

If they move closer to the centre then they will be locked out of power forever, because Farage and Reform aren't going anywhere if they do. The only way they can challenge for power again is if they adopt a Farage-like stance on both immigration and the culture wars. "Parliament will get a vote each year on a cap" won't cut it, because nobody trusts MPs to cap it at the level that demographic wants it at (which is net zero). Whether it is possible for the tories to merge with Reform in this way is not clear, because of a fundamental difference in priorities. Ultimately for Reform the number one priority is ending immigration, and for the tories it is preserving the wealth of the very rich. The problem is that these two priorities are coming increasingly into conflict.

I'll be going to bed as soon as the exit poll is announced and probably wake at 4ish for the fun.

I'll be here.

[UndercoverElephant]

I currently feel conflicted about two things. I don't trust the polls, not because I think they are being rigged pro-Labour to influence the result, but because I suspect that the models are based on previous elections where there was no serious challenge to the tories from the right. The pollsters will doubtless try to compensate for this, but their record of getting this sort of adjustment right is very poor.

Part of me doesn't want to believe it is true, because I don't want to set myself up for a disappointment. Don't count your chickens before they hatch and all that. It breeds complacency, which is why Labour itself says it doesn't believe the polls, and doesn't want the electorate to believe them either. This sort of sentiment has been expressed by several other people here.

But another part of me is instinctively thinking that what is going on now is very much like the Brexit referendum, which the pollsters got horribly wrong. The average of the polls clearly predicted a Remain victory -- not huge, but sufficiently big that most Remainers had no idea they could be wrong enough for the result to go the other way.

Why did they get it wrong? People can google that question for themselves, but I think was partly because a lot of people who voted to leave the EU were scared to admit they were going to do so -- even to the extent that they didn't admit it even to themselves until the last few days of the campaign. They were also more likely to be people who had previously never voted at all, but in that situation decided it was time for their voices to be heard. It was also partly because the sort of people who are responsible for the models were themselves heavily skewed towards Remain, and so had a natural tendency to find the Leave viewpoint harder to understand, and easier to underestimate. My point is that a similar set of circumstances are in play right now, and this may mean that the polls are, on average, significantly under-estimating Reform's vote. If Reform end up with 20 seats then I for one will not be surprised. But if that happens then they are really going to hurt the tories everywhere -- Labour could end up winning seats that even they don't think they can possibly win.

So right now, for me, the range of believable outcomes for this election is unusually large. I can imagine the tories winning 200 seats, and I can also imagine them being reduced to below 50.

[Default0ptions]

Do you really think that the outcome of any vote will make the slightest difference to anything other than the arrangement of deckchairs on the Titanic.

“'If Voting Made a Difference, They Wouldn't Let Us Do It'”

Mark Twain

[UndercoverElephant]

Do you really think that the outcome of any vote will make the slightest difference to anything other than the arrangement of deckchairs on the Titanic.

“'If Voting Made a Difference, They Wouldn't Let Us Do It'”

Mark Twain

Your opinion on all topics is worthless. Go away.

[Default0ptions]

Do you really think that the outcome of any vote will make the slightest difference to anything other than the arrangement of deckchairs on the Titanic.

“'If Voting Made a Difference, They Wouldn't Let Us Do It'”

Mark Twain

Your opinion on all topics is worthless. Go away.

I don’t think I’m alone here, UE - none of the ‘deer in the headlights’ politicians paraded before us seem to have even an inkling of an understanding of conventional oil peaking in around 2005.

And even less understanding that the national debt not only can’t be repayed - let alone that it won’t be repayed.

Without that basic understanding of the world as it is - not even smoke and mirrors or bread and circuses can do any good.

[Default0ptions]

Do you really think that the outcome of any vote will make the slightest difference to anything other than the arrangement of deckchairs on the Titanic.

“'If Voting Made a Difference, They Wouldn't Let Us Do It'”

Mark Twain

Your opinion on all topics is worthless. Go away.

Hmm. Reddit thought that about you.

[mr brightside]

...but I will be up until breakfast time, by which time I will be extremely drunk.

On what; moonshine, elderberry wine?

[BritDownUnder]

I remember travelling back home from London to vote in the 1997 election just making it by the time the polling station in the village hall closed.

The following morning there was a live TV shot from a helicopter following Blair from his home in some upwardly mobile part of London to Buckingham Palace and there was a sense of optimism. It didn't last though did it? Iraq war, terrorism on the London underground, pensions taxes, education spending that went nowhere.

Labour will not be able to solve the National Debt or immigration I suspect. Maybe they will tax the rich (i.e. the Middle Class - or what remains of them - and go for the easy pickings like pensions and inheritance, maybe raise dividend taxes). Make a few changes here and there - private schools and cannabis.

If I were Labour I would go for more renewables and nuclear and of course my favourite - tidal energy.

[UndercoverElephant]

...but I will be up until breakfast time, by which time I will be extremely drunk.

On what; moonshine, elderberry wine?

Beer and champagne.

[UndercoverElephant]

Labour dives head first into major trouble over "gender":

https://archive.is/lorlJ

Labour will make it easier for people to legally transition by removing the need for them to prove they have lived as their preferred gender for two years.

Under existing rules, transgender people wishing to have their new gender legally recognised must obtain a gender recognition certificate (GRC).
They are required to submit proof that they have changed genders, which can include official documents such as utility bills or passports, or even library cards or supermarket loyalty cards.

Officials insist on two years’ worth of documentation to ensure the person is prepared for a permanent change. However, The Times has learnt that Labour will ditch the requirement in an attempt to “remove indignities for trans people who deserve recognition and acceptance”.

Instead, transgender people will be required to undergo an effective cooling-off period for two years after their application for a GRC is submitted. Their new gender will then be signed off by a single doctor specialising in gender issues.

The party will also ditch the panel of doctors and lawyers which now approves GRCs.

However, an idea to have them signed off by a single GP has been jettisoned, after party figures including Wes Streeting, the shadow health secretary, raised concerns about the impact on family doctors.

As well as simplifying the application process, Labour will also get rid of a requirement to have consent from the spouse of the person wishing to change gender.

The changes are likely to heighten concern among critics over Labour’s approach to transgender issues. It comes after JK Rowling, the Harry Potter author, accused Labour of “abandoning women” over its stance of gender.

There is no way I could ever vote for a Labour Party which enacts this policy. I think they are going to end up regretting it, and u-turning on it. It may take a while though. I don't believe they understand the scale and intensity of the opposition. I have zero faith in the judgement of "doctors specialising in gender issues". These people have already proved themselves to be ideologically-driven, anti-scientific and not worthy of the title "doctor". The very concept of "gender" as it is currently used is scientifically meaningless. It 100% ideological dogma. https://www.DODGY TAX AVOIDERS.co.uk/End-Gender-Deb ... 1982132515

I think this issue going to explode in the coming parliament. I am expecting Kemi Badenoch to become tory leader, and Farage to win in Clacton. Both of them will roast Labour alive on this issue. It is clear that Labour thinks it can get away with some sort of "middle way" approach -- that they can somehow take the heat out of the debate and find a compromise between the two sides. This indicates a failure to understand the issue itself. No compromise is possible. You either make clear that "gender" has got nothing to do with science and objective reality -- that it a self-declared social construct which others are therefore free to reject or ignore -- or you introduce this concept of "gender" which leads to intentional confusion over very serious issues. In other words, the whole purpose of inventing this term "gender" is to subsequently blur the line between gender and biological sex. Therefore no compromise is possible. Both Farage and Badenoch have committed themselves to exactly this view, but Labour cannot do so without a massive internal war.

[Mark]

...but I will be up until breakfast time, by which time I will be extremely drunk.

On what; moonshine, elderberry wine?

Beer and champagne.

I have a nice bottle of whiskey lined up - hope I last the night....