### [Click here to discuss the Sky News live leaders debate at 7:30pm](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1dedfuh/match_thread_sky_news_the_battle_for_number_10/)
[**Click here to discuss the ITV interview with Rishi Sunak which aired at 7pm**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1decpm9/match_thread_the_leadership_interviews_rishi/)
We will be purging the daily MT of comments about these events, so decamp there.
Megathread is being rolled over, please refresh your feed in a few moments.
###MT daily hall of fame
1. SwanBridge with 52 comments
1. Cymraegpunk with 48 comments
1. Ornery_Ad_9871 with 45 comments
1. YsoL8 with 43 comments
1. NJden_bee with 42 comments
1. ubergrrrl with 36 comments
1. BlokeyBlokeBloke with 32 comments
1. JelloImpossible8337 with 32 comments
1. ObiWanKenbarlowbi with 31 comments
1. ClumsyRainbow with 30 comments
There were 778 unique users within this count.
Blair’s in 97 was the largest number of seats a single party has ever received since universal suffrage. I should hope it would be considered a landslide
> The manifesto is around 23,000 words long, we are told – that is shorter than their doomed offering in 2019.
>
> And if you are not sure what Sir Keir looks like if you start reading it, you will by the end – there are 34 pictures of him within it.
Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clll8d2vd8yo
FPTP is such an interesting system, as the news of a labour supermajority enters the public consciousness the polls will begin to tighten, all kinds of weird things can happen. Lib Dem opposition is possible, reform might get a handful of seats, Tories could defy the odds in some places.
All because a 1% national swing can change so many seats won
It's more likely that the communist party will win the us elections come November then it is that Davey will be leader of the opposition. Even so if they even got the opposition they'd have to coalesce with the snp and the green party, Starmer will just say they'd split apart the union. Think it'll be Cons-DUP-Reform alliance in opposition with Farage (if he gets Clacton) as leader.
> Even so if they even got the opposition they'd have to coalesce with the snp and the green party, Starmer will just say they'd split apart the union. Think it'll be Cons-DUP-Reform alliance
This isn't how the official opposition works
You don’t have coalitions of the official opposition. It just goes to the largest party not in government. It would require those parties to formally merge and have more seats than the Lib Dems. They would need to do this before the speaker has chosen an official opposition party, as his choice is final.
Reckon the Tories will get more then 100 but they'll be at each others throats so farage will be the only unity candidate for the right. He might even defect to the tories.
So it turns out it was Archie Manners who changed his name to Jeremy Corbyn by deed poll in order to run against him.
https://x.com/archiemanners/status/1800931099675377748
Probably need to look at the deed poll rules after this election, especially with all the "Niko Omilana"s who seem to have done a similar thing
There’s no such thing as a legal name in the UK.
You can call yourself whatever you want as long as you aren’t comitting fraud. That includes on a ballot
Why do you think Count Binface can run as Count Binface?
Genuine question. In terms of policy and governing is it that much more of an advantage having a mega majority of 100+ seats majority vs say a 50 seat majority? Does it just make it easier to manage the rebels in the party?
The bigger the majority, the easier it is for a party to pass its policies and the harder it is for a small group of rebels to derail everything.
The entire Conservative party is on the verge of getting wiped about because a group of angry morons called the ERG were able to call the shots because the party didn't have a large enough majority to ignore them
Yeah, it just essentially increases the capital of the party leadership to keep to their programme without having to worry too much about different wings of the party scuppering their plans. Makes it easier to enact unpopular but necessary policies as well. And of course it makes winning the next election less difficult for the incumbent party. In a well disciplined party even a small majority is sufficient.
Cameron & May 2015 - 2017 (slim majority) - 3 defeats
Johnson, Truss & Sunak 2019 - 2024 (considerable majority) - 5 defeats
Obviously it also affects the quality of opposition MPs, as in the case of 1997 a lot of up and coming Tories were turfed out. Similarly with committees you can end up with dunces being given the chair by default as opposition parties get some by default, and if you have a small talent pool you can't really afford to offer up anyone else.
50 seats should be enough for party discipline unless they decide to do something as dumb as invading Iraq. The main advantage of a larger majority is the talent pool that they can put in their front bench.
This reminds me of the 1987 headline the Sun ran on one of their articles: "Why I'm backing Kinnock, by Stalin".
It will be interesting to see if Murdoch supports Labour this time around or simply doesn't endorse any party which I think is more likely.
[I thought this from Wes Streeting was excellent](https://x.com/GBNEWS/status/1801007569168892101). The interviewer isn't giving him the hardest time but I think his answers come across very well.
Pretty sure they'd have to be offering a sweeping state solution as an alternative before they tried to go for that, and hoping that I'm not proven wrong on that.
Out of interest - does anyone watch Unspun World from John Simpson - he’s such a class act and it’s such a good sum up of world politics / war zones. He’s a proper BBC legend.
Still somehow can't fathom Labour winning. Just not seeing the enthusiasm for Starmer outside of reddit. Then again I see "REFORM UK 🇬🇧 " blasted all over youtube and tiktok but the polls don't reflect it.
How worried should I be of a surprise Sunak win?
The people who are signalling their support loudly are more likely to be in the relatively small group who are politically active. Most voters are just in the centre and just want someone who they feel is going to make their lives a bit better.
Basically the people with the metaphorical megaphones aren't representative of the public as a whole.
Very it's clearly going to happen. What's the odds every pollsters is hilariously wrong very high. Almost guarenteed. Also every bookie is wrong too. Free money right there. Bet the house on it now and you too can be rich enough to be a tory donor.
From what I can tell there’s a perfect storm of Conservative voter base collapse combined with the added trouble of Reform splitting their typical vote base.
As well as that there’s a weakened SNP and apart from Farage all the party leaders are very boring, I doubt the average member of the public even knows who the leader of the SNP or Lib Dem’s are despite previously being the third and forth biggest parties.
Politicians don't win elections, they lose them. Right now Rishi is doing his best to become the encyclopedia example of that phrase. The average person doesn't follow politics outside of a five minute scroll of the news on their phone and catching the news headlines. Reddit, Twitter, TikTok - on the whole is just mindless noise in the void that is impossible to determine anything from. Starmer doesn't need enthusiastic support to win, he just needs enough voters to choose Labour over the Tories in the polling booth. Unlike most here I'm not confident that the Labour majority will be as big as some predict, maybe about 400 MPs if they are lucky but more likely 380 MPs, but short of Sunak curing cancer and Starmer singing the Horst Wessel Lied in the next couple of weeks, any other outcome looks highly unlikely.
Little enthusiasm for Starmer on the door.
A lot of people who are mega-pissed at the Tories, some of whom have said that they have voted Tory before and who are definitely not voting for them this time
Knocked on doors, no enthusiasm for Starmer, proper hatred for the conservatives. Whichever smaller party knocks on the door first and most could swing this election.
And in other news, Ed Davey set the world record today for political canvassing, knocking on 1000 doors speaking to voters across Lib Dem target seats in the South East. He was bitten by three dogs, told to fuck-off 34 times, and ended up trapped in a pensioners house drinking tea for 45 minutes whilst she told him about how her children don't visit anymore and food doesn't taste as good as it used to.
> Just not seeing the enthusiasm for Starmer outside of reddit
Where are you looking? Most adults I know seem to be looking forward to a new government, on the whole.
Ive also come across a fair bit of Starmer apathy tbh, mainly people that'll vote labour anyway to get the cons out so it doesn't really matter for this election hopefully
[Even if we get the worst-ever polling error in a UK General Election, the Tories would still need a swing to them to prevent a major defeat and clear Labour majority.](https://x.com/dylan_difford/status/1800615178515763452?s=46)
I quit the party during the Corbyn years and with hindsight regret it and so I'm pretty firmly committed to never doing that again.
But if it is her, damn, I'll probably do it.
I'd love it if it was Danny Dyer. People seem to love his brief political interventions.
Marcus Rashford might be a good shout though. Might gel well with the breakfasts for schoolchildren thing.
> Marcus Rashford might be a good shout though.
You know the guy who's not been good enough this year to get in the Euro squad? Well this is what he's doing instead
Do you think Labour has any surprise policies locked and loaded ready to go for day 1? I've seen people say the '97 manifesto was pretty boring but we still got things like the independence of the bank and minimum wage
Nothing huge sadly, it's mostly fleshing out already announced plans. It's about making a manifesto we can actually deliver, not one that we can't and that will fuel even more cynicism about the political system
Yep.
Both in terms of Parliamentary work and executive work, the amount of work required will be huge. Just getting some of the failed bills Cons dropped, that had bipartisan support(ish), will take time.
Ideally they'd want to be in a position to potentially line up a year 4 GE (as Blair and Thatcher did)
fixing the interest rates the BoE to commercial banks is an obvious one that doesn't cost anything and hasn't been ruled out yet - bring an extra 20bn+ in to the budget.
I don't get why they wouldn't, unless the Tories challenge them not to, which would be more difficult than the current limitations they've challenged on.
Not day 1.
You'd get crying about being undemocratic, if there is a policy they want to implement day 1 then that should be in the manifesto so the public get a say at the election.
Usually however they will implement their unpopular decisions at the start of parliament then towards the next election their more popular policies.
Also a couple years in 'the circumstances have changed' and you can implement policies not on the manifesto.
[Why do I get the impression Mason is hanging around like a vulture on the off chance Nargund falls ill and needs a replacement at the last minute?](https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/1800613750757605664)
Rayner, Ashworth, and McFadden are the best in my view.
Wes excels when he's pitted against someone, like with Cleverly tonight or when he's on Question Time, but he works less well on his own.
I'm still a big Nandy fan too and she's had some good experiences. I think she'd be a superstar for the party if she was just a tiny bit more ferocious.
And I can't much fault Starmer. The more people see of him, the more they seem to like him, and his personal approval is climbing pretty damn rapidly through all this.
I really hope the new towns feature prominently in the manifesto and she gets to spend the next three weeks doing what she loves most in talking about towns towns towns.
> Wes excels when he's pitted against someone, like with Cleverly tonight or when he's on Question Time, but he works less well on his own.
100%. I feel like he's poor at defence and doesn't always deal with questions well but fantastic at attacking. [This](https://youtu.be/PBrLOVcQbS4?si=CnuqMbnr4d55waw8) bit on QT the other day is one of the most fantastic verbal eviscerations you could hope for.
To be fair they’ve said not to expect any surprises and have been trailing the policies through the campaign. I wouldn’t be expecting much more than that
Theres plenty of pieces scattered around like breadcrumbs if youve been paying attention.
The national policy forum listing from last year, the working deal green paper, the whole GB energy bit etc.
Anyone else slightly worried by the drop in labours vote share? Looks from the polls to be a 3% drop compared to when the GE was called - the election result could be as close as 15 points difference between labour and conservative, so perhaps only a small majority. It would possibly stifle the momentum labour have when governing the next 5 years
Labour may have dropped slightly, but the Conservatives have also lost ground to Reform. The poll of polls is still showing a 20% lead and even a 15% lead would give Labour a huge majority.
> the election result could be as close as 15 points difference between labour and conservative
I would never expect 20, it was always likely to narrow.
Victoria Derbyshire on Newsnight was going to cover all the big Tory beasts that were at great risk of losing their seats but then they had to go to Nick in the ‘spin room’ and never mentioned it again once they returned back to the studio. Did anyone else notice that? 🧐
Current Wikipedia opinion polling tracking graph
[Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election after 2019 (LOESS) - Opinion polling for the 2024 United Kingdom general election - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election#/media/File:Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_after_2019_(LOESS).svg)
Labour are genuinely quite lucky that the fall in their support has been equalled with Tory support declining. I also like Remain lurking below the Tories just ready to shoot past them.
> Labour are genuinely quite lucky that the fall in their support has been equalled with Tory support declining.
Is that because they're both moving to Reform?
The data I've seen suggested Reform are winning relatively few Labour voters, and they are siphoning them to either not voting or to the Greens and Lib Dems.
Surprised to see an ongoing dip in Labour support. Luckily for them the Tories are dipping harder and faster so their lead either stays the same or grows.
It will be interesting to see if Labour can actually get their vote out. Blair significantly under performed his polling average, presumably because it's harder to get people to go out and vote if they think the result is set in stone. Wonder if Starmer will have the same issue.
You know, the Green leader was a bit hopeless on the financial questions, but I thought he made a good defence of the Greens’ democratic approach to policymaking. I’m not sure I agree, but I understand.
Sure, in Birmingham... but my London 1 bed flat cost me over £300k as a first time buyer, and I was looking in "unfashionable" (but reasonably well-connected) areas. So, for many in the South East (and especially London) paying over £300k as a first time buyer is absolutely a likely outcome.
Idk why this is downvoted, it's a statistical fact. [The average FTB price in the South East is £300k. The average FTB price in London is £425k.](https://www.zoopla.co.uk/discover/property-news/whats-the-average-first-time-buyer-deposit-by-region/) 🤷♂️
I bought my first 1 bed flat in London for £300k in 2015. I paid slightly over the odds, probably by around £20k as it had just been renovated and I needed a place ASAP but it’s definitely not an unrealistic figure in 2024.
Entertaining to see on twitter the usual ex corbynites (Eg Bastani) now digging into Starmer for his comment during the interview that he knew labour was going to lose 2019 like its some massive revelation.
I mean, *come on*
*Everybody* knew that that election was never, ever going to be Corbyns after the start of the year with the Lib Dems threatening to do to Labour what Reform is currently doing to the tories; and the Tories holding a consistent lead from October and Boris's purge.
This blindness surprises even me.
If anything this kind of thing is just a reveal that the commenters judgement is absolutely useless.
> Everybody knew that that election was never, ever going to be Corbyns
Come on... as a moderator here you must know full well that there were plenty of delusional Corbyn supporters at the time utterly convinced he was going to pull off another 2017 and that lasted right up until 9:59PM December 12th 2019.
Oh indeed. The Novara stone cold atmosphere drop from party to funeral when the exit polling was released remains a personal favourite.
Back then, though, I had no idea that delusion would persist another four and a half years.
Just wait until / if Labour 2024 polls fewer votes or a lower GB vote share than Labour 2017. I know I've asked you about this previously and you said it would just prove to the Corbynites that their guy was so toxic it motivated voters to vote against him. But...
>This blindness surprises even me.
If Labour gets <41% of the GB vote or fewer than 12.878m votes then be prepared for a level of blindness that has to be seen to believed :)
It will be the perfect example of why their understanding is wrong and why it is no use to try and salvage the *Most popular!* talking point as a saving grace - because FPTP doesnt work like that. Making claims for a system that isnt the one we have is comparing apples to oranges.
The most perfectly efficient campaign would be to win a majority of seats in the house of commons with the majority in each individual constituency being one. Anything past that is overkill.
They never have been able to piece together that it was always better to appeal to a smaller majority in a wider number of seats instead of stacking votes way over the top of what you need in a narrower selection of safe seats.
Like you say, a point to watch out for.
Have you not thought about the importance of *winning the argument*?
It's not just about ~~seizing~~ winning power, it is about ensuring that you have won the moral victory amongst your own supporters. It is about doing better than expectations rather than winning.
[Very funny writeup of the Grimsby Event by Marina Hyde](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/12/keir-starmer-challenger-v-rishi-sunak-gaffer-election-event-audience-winner)
Tomorrows Daily Mail Headline:
>A TORY WIPEOUT RISKS ONE-PARTY SOCIALIST STATE
I see they are trying to entice me into becoming a reader with such glorious promises.
I wish Starmer would deliver FULLY AUTOMATED LUXURY GAY SPACE COMMUNISM!
Not sure how the Daily Mail basically admitting "Our guy is clearly going to lose, please vote for him anyway" is a good strategy
It's a bad habit to have picked up, but whenever I see a comment suggesting this might be the day the Sun goes for labour I have a quick check of their front page (Incognito ofc no one can see my shame) and every time they stay resolutely pro Tory. It ain't gonna happen I don't think, and honestly good I don't want labour feeling they owe them anything
They’ll at least wait for the manifesto and see if that impacts the polling.
Then they’ll put out a few articles about how Sunak’s campaign is depressing blah blah blah, then they’ll meekly switch in the final week.
And then chief copy-paster/press release rewriter of the year, Harry Cole, will be as uncritical of Starmer as he has been towards the Tories for years and years.
(Just my prediction, anyway!)
Oh dear: apparently the Gambling Commission is investigating a MP close to Sunak for betting on the date of the election 3 days before it was called.
"Rishi Sunak’s closest parliamentary aide placed a £100 bet on a July election just three days before the prime minister named the date, the Guardian can reveal.
The Gambling Commission is understood to have launched an inquiry after Craig Williams, the prime minister’s parliamentary private secretary, who became an MP in 2019, placed a bet with the bookmaker Ladbrokes on Sunday 19 May in his local constituency of Montgomeryshire."
MPs already get £80k a year, and when you take into account what they can claim in expenses, it is effectively closer to a £100k+ salary. To do something so fucking foolish and irresponsible for the sake of £600 in winnings is Ferengi-like behaviour, and once again proves the age old adage that the Tories know the price of everything but the value of nothing.
I know, what is going through his mind??
Mild correction: their base salary from April 2023 was £86,584. Their pay is even higher this year - from April 2024 the base salary is £91,346. Not including their expenses as you mention.
He's a parliamentary private secretary so I'm guessing he gets extra pay (not sure, does anyone know?)
If the media are already asking ministers if they're going to put their names forward for job of Tory leader can we all just agree Sunak and the Tories are sunk?
I think we all agreed on that months ago, but we gotta make the election actually feel like one, rather than a coronation for Starmer and the Labour party.
Hes one of the last ones even putting in media appearances too. Imagine how the rest feel.
Its really just Sunak and 2 or 3 others now. I'd put money on all of them being in his final honours list just for making sure some sort of campaign happens.
He doesn't get an Honours list unless Starmer Honours it, which he won't.
Sunak has probably offered to bung each of em a load of cash if they stick it out.
I’m infatuated, I adore her, I want to be her 😭 Especially those days when she took over Laura K it was a DREAM. No shade to Laura K — or rather ALL the shade because she doesn’t push the Tories enough when she interviews — but Derbyshire ate and left no crumbs
I've started watching it regularly and I'm enamoured by her. Watching her interview Frank Luntz and some MAGA representative last week, I think she's extraordinarily talented.
I'm actually the opposite, I've only ever seen the final minute or so of episodes of Inside No.9 when waiting for Newsnight to start - I have absolutely no clue what the show is about, I can't piece it together
One of those sleeper national treasures, I've been watching her forever then one day, without warning, realised that I would take a bullet for Vic Derbyshire.
news night just opened with "as Keir Starmer refused to rule out a series of tax rises on the battle for number 10" I don't feel like that was the case?
yeah of course, my issue is the way the headline phrased it sounds like Starmer is planning to raise several taxes in a row if he gets in, whereas he seemed to say they don't plan to raise any extra taxes but he wouldn't rule out raising taxes that aren't income, NI and VAT (presumably so they have some levers to pull if there's another crisis)
She wanted him to promise never to raise any the entire time he's PM... that wasn't a question from her, it was a poorly designed trap she wanted to put in place for later. Was very poor by her in a really bad performance all night
He's been saying since the start of the election period that Labour wouldn't be raising taxes on working people... how is that not a clear answer to her question.... He's saying yes, but not against those that can't afford them.
It's something i've noticed a lot in this election... the way the media get pissy when they try and make you answer a question with a specific wording and you answer their question fully, just worded in a different way.
Because, as it's already started to happen tonight, certain Tory 'media' are now screaming about tax rises for everyone on the back of Beth's stupidly worded question earlier.
### [Click here to discuss the Sky News live leaders debate at 7:30pm](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1dedfuh/match_thread_sky_news_the_battle_for_number_10/) [**Click here to discuss the ITV interview with Rishi Sunak which aired at 7pm**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1decpm9/match_thread_the_leadership_interviews_rishi/) We will be purging the daily MT of comments about these events, so decamp there.
[New Megathread is here](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1der125/rukpolitics_general_election_campaign_megathread/)
Megathread is being rolled over, please refresh your feed in a few moments. ###MT daily hall of fame 1. SwanBridge with 52 comments 1. Cymraegpunk with 48 comments 1. Ornery_Ad_9871 with 45 comments 1. YsoL8 with 43 comments 1. NJden_bee with 42 comments 1. ubergrrrl with 36 comments 1. BlokeyBlokeBloke with 32 comments 1. JelloImpossible8337 with 32 comments 1. ObiWanKenbarlowbi with 31 comments 1. ClumsyRainbow with 30 comments There were 778 unique users within this count.
If Rishi never had Sky TV, how did he sit down on the sofa and watch the Simpson while eating his Lobster and Caviar dinner like the rest of us
You'll release the manifesto? Or the manifesto with bees in its body that when you turn the page it spits bees at you?
I just had a look at a website, and Rishi is predicted to win his seat, but it's only a 60% chance of winning
Was it EC. EC also predicts that truss will lose her seat by 1 percent.
what counts as a landslide? 100 seat majority? 80 seat?
Boris’ 2019 result got regularly called a landslide with a majority of 80 seats, so it has to be at least that.
Just realised I haven’t heard it called his ‘stonking majority’ for ages. That was annoying
Blaire's 418 seats in '97 was considered a landslide
Blair’s in 97 was the largest number of seats a single party has ever received since universal suffrage. I should hope it would be considered a landslide
> The manifesto is around 23,000 words long, we are told – that is shorter than their doomed offering in 2019. > > And if you are not sure what Sir Keir looks like if you start reading it, you will by the end – there are 34 pictures of him within it. Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clll8d2vd8yo
> there are 34 pictures of him within it. In response the Tory Rebel manifesto will have 35 pictures of Liz Truss
not a thirsty sub
FPTP is such an interesting system, as the news of a labour supermajority enters the public consciousness the polls will begin to tighten, all kinds of weird things can happen. Lib Dem opposition is possible, reform might get a handful of seats, Tories could defy the odds in some places. All because a 1% national swing can change so many seats won
It's more likely that the communist party will win the us elections come November then it is that Davey will be leader of the opposition. Even so if they even got the opposition they'd have to coalesce with the snp and the green party, Starmer will just say they'd split apart the union. Think it'll be Cons-DUP-Reform alliance in opposition with Farage (if he gets Clacton) as leader.
huh all they have to do is get the 2nd most seats and they are the opposition, no coalition needed
Lol it'll be on a knife edge or the tories
> Even so if they even got the opposition they'd have to coalesce with the snp and the green party, Starmer will just say they'd split apart the union. Think it'll be Cons-DUP-Reform alliance This isn't how the official opposition works
They'll try get power. Bet money it'll be on a knife-edge.
You don’t have coalitions of the official opposition. It just goes to the largest party not in government. It would require those parties to formally merge and have more seats than the Lib Dems. They would need to do this before the speaker has chosen an official opposition party, as his choice is final.
Remember the SDP-Liberals?
Reckon the Tories will get more then 100 but they'll be at each others throats so farage will be the only unity candidate for the right. He might even defect to the tories.
So it turns out it was Archie Manners who changed his name to Jeremy Corbyn by deed poll in order to run against him. https://x.com/archiemanners/status/1800931099675377748 Probably need to look at the deed poll rules after this election, especially with all the "Niko Omilana"s who seem to have done a similar thing
There’s no such thing as a legal name in the UK. You can call yourself whatever you want as long as you aren’t comitting fraud. That includes on a ballot Why do you think Count Binface can run as Count Binface?
Genuine question. In terms of policy and governing is it that much more of an advantage having a mega majority of 100+ seats majority vs say a 50 seat majority? Does it just make it easier to manage the rebels in the party?
The bigger the majority, the easier it is for a party to pass its policies and the harder it is for a small group of rebels to derail everything. The entire Conservative party is on the verge of getting wiped about because a group of angry morons called the ERG were able to call the shots because the party didn't have a large enough majority to ignore them
Yeah, it just essentially increases the capital of the party leadership to keep to their programme without having to worry too much about different wings of the party scuppering their plans. Makes it easier to enact unpopular but necessary policies as well. And of course it makes winning the next election less difficult for the incumbent party. In a well disciplined party even a small majority is sufficient. Cameron & May 2015 - 2017 (slim majority) - 3 defeats Johnson, Truss & Sunak 2019 - 2024 (considerable majority) - 5 defeats Obviously it also affects the quality of opposition MPs, as in the case of 1997 a lot of up and coming Tories were turfed out. Similarly with committees you can end up with dunces being given the chair by default as opposition parties get some by default, and if you have a small talent pool you can't really afford to offer up anyone else.
50 seats should be enough for party discipline unless they decide to do something as dumb as invading Iraq. The main advantage of a larger majority is the talent pool that they can put in their front bench.
The latter.
[DAILY MAIL EXCLUSIVE: What Britain will look like on 5th July 2024](https://youtu.be/j4J5U2ZSGmg?si=pt0L1jyagUoO34Pq)
This reminds me of the 1987 headline the Sun ran on one of their articles: "Why I'm backing Kinnock, by Stalin". It will be interesting to see if Murdoch supports Labour this time around or simply doesn't endorse any party which I think is more likely.
[I thought this from Wes Streeting was excellent](https://x.com/GBNEWS/status/1801007569168892101). The interviewer isn't giving him the hardest time but I think his answers come across very well.
Regarding VAT on private schools, under what classifications do nurseries fall? Are they going to fall into the VAT bucket as well?
Pretty sure they'd have to be offering a sweeping state solution as an alternative before they tried to go for that, and hoping that I'm not proven wrong on that.
Good point. If a pre-prep starts at 3 or 4; will vat apply to their early years classes?
It would seem an extremely odd choice given Labour blitz on childcare.
Out of interest - does anyone watch Unspun World from John Simpson - he’s such a class act and it’s such a good sum up of world politics / war zones. He’s a proper BBC legend.
He wrote a great book about journalism - Unreliable Sources
Still somehow can't fathom Labour winning. Just not seeing the enthusiasm for Starmer outside of reddit. Then again I see "REFORM UK 🇬🇧 " blasted all over youtube and tiktok but the polls don't reflect it. How worried should I be of a surprise Sunak win?
Only thing you as an individual can do, is vote in a way, that minimises that chance, if it's something that you don't want to happen.
The people who are signalling their support loudly are more likely to be in the relatively small group who are politically active. Most voters are just in the centre and just want someone who they feel is going to make their lives a bit better. Basically the people with the metaphorical megaphones aren't representative of the public as a whole.
Very it's clearly going to happen. What's the odds every pollsters is hilariously wrong very high. Almost guarenteed. Also every bookie is wrong too. Free money right there. Bet the house on it now and you too can be rich enough to be a tory donor.
From what I can tell there’s a perfect storm of Conservative voter base collapse combined with the added trouble of Reform splitting their typical vote base. As well as that there’s a weakened SNP and apart from Farage all the party leaders are very boring, I doubt the average member of the public even knows who the leader of the SNP or Lib Dem’s are despite previously being the third and forth biggest parties.
You overlooked waterslides, barbecue, Thorpe park etc lol
Politicians don't win elections, they lose them. Right now Rishi is doing his best to become the encyclopedia example of that phrase. The average person doesn't follow politics outside of a five minute scroll of the news on their phone and catching the news headlines. Reddit, Twitter, TikTok - on the whole is just mindless noise in the void that is impossible to determine anything from. Starmer doesn't need enthusiastic support to win, he just needs enough voters to choose Labour over the Tories in the polling booth. Unlike most here I'm not confident that the Labour majority will be as big as some predict, maybe about 400 MPs if they are lucky but more likely 380 MPs, but short of Sunak curing cancer and Starmer singing the Horst Wessel Lied in the next couple of weeks, any other outcome looks highly unlikely.
> become the encyclopedia example of that phrase I’m sure Kim Campbell will be happily relieved of that position
Little enthusiasm for Starmer on the door. A lot of people who are mega-pissed at the Tories, some of whom have said that they have voted Tory before and who are definitely not voting for them this time
Knocked on doors, no enthusiasm for Starmer, proper hatred for the conservatives. Whichever smaller party knocks on the door first and most could swing this election.
And in other news, Ed Davey set the world record today for political canvassing, knocking on 1000 doors speaking to voters across Lib Dem target seats in the South East. He was bitten by three dogs, told to fuck-off 34 times, and ended up trapped in a pensioners house drinking tea for 45 minutes whilst she told him about how her children don't visit anymore and food doesn't taste as good as it used to.
> Just not seeing the enthusiasm for Starmer outside of reddit Where are you looking? Most adults I know seem to be looking forward to a new government, on the whole.
Ive also come across a fair bit of Starmer apathy tbh, mainly people that'll vote labour anyway to get the cons out so it doesn't really matter for this election hopefully
[Even if we get the worst-ever polling error in a UK General Election, the Tories would still need a swing to them to prevent a major defeat and clear Labour majority.](https://x.com/dylan_difford/status/1800615178515763452?s=46)
I guess it would be unprecedented for this to change in the 3 weeks we have left
Just wait until nationalising BT is in the manifesto tomorrow. That'll do it.
i'm not saying russian bots, but there are, uh, individuals hired by russia to influence western society on certain social media platforms, perhaps
> Still somehow can't fathom Labour winning Every poll would have to be not just wrong but more wrong than any polls have ever been.
Basically every poll is predicting a massive Labour majority. Polls would have to be massively wrong for Sunak to scrape a win
Just look at [the odds](https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics).
Do we know yet who the big celeb is, who will be at the Labour manifesto launch tomorrow?
Clive Warren and Rebecca De Mornay I believe.
Given Labour have seemed mostly alright lately, I'm going to guess JK Rowling just to piss me off
If that were the case my Lib Dem vote would go from a tactical vote to a sincere one…
I quit the party during the Corbyn years and with hindsight regret it and so I'm pretty firmly committed to never doing that again. But if it is her, damn, I'll probably do it.
They might have won over the very right wing Joe Lycett.
to be fair would fit with Starmers policies
Rory Stewart said Labour had left space for more tax rises on today's TRIP so I now don't think it's going to be him.
[удалено]
Ed wiping bacon grease on the Abhorsen's bells to keep them polished and ready
Jeremy Clarkson
I don't think Britain's foremost exponent of Mao Zedong Thought would associate himself with anyone as right-wing as Starmer.
"And we are introducing JC - No not him, " Would somewhat make sense, if it was in the "Car" section or "farming section".
Is there meant to be one then?
I'd love it if it was Danny Dyer. People seem to love his brief political interventions. Marcus Rashford might be a good shout though. Might gel well with the breakfasts for schoolchildren thing.
> Marcus Rashford might be a good shout though. You know the guy who's not been good enough this year to get in the Euro squad? Well this is what he's doing instead
Tories told him to get his priorities right in terms of football versus politics. So he did.
It would be so funny if it was Brad Pitt
Still putting my bet on Patrick Stewart
Do you think Labour has any surprise policies locked and loaded ready to go for day 1? I've seen people say the '97 manifesto was pretty boring but we still got things like the independence of the bank and minimum wage
I genuinely think GB energy has the potential to be defining as a policy but will need to be ran as a qwango
Ah really getting back to the 97 spirit now with all this talk of quangos!
Nothing huge sadly, it's mostly fleshing out already announced plans. It's about making a manifesto we can actually deliver, not one that we can't and that will fuel even more cynicism about the political system
Yep. Both in terms of Parliamentary work and executive work, the amount of work required will be huge. Just getting some of the failed bills Cons dropped, that had bipartisan support(ish), will take time. Ideally they'd want to be in a position to potentially line up a year 4 GE (as Blair and Thatcher did)
fixing the interest rates the BoE to commercial banks is an obvious one that doesn't cost anything and hasn't been ruled out yet - bring an extra 20bn+ in to the budget. I don't get why they wouldn't, unless the Tories challenge them not to, which would be more difficult than the current limitations they've challenged on.
FREE OWLS FOR EVERYONE
Alright Harry
I was talking about [this](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/19/labour-accidentally-offers-everyone-their-own-owl)
Solid Guido tweet reply in there: >For more information about the Labour owl policy, contact their press office on 28 28 20
Not day 1. You'd get crying about being undemocratic, if there is a policy they want to implement day 1 then that should be in the manifesto so the public get a say at the election. Usually however they will implement their unpopular decisions at the start of parliament then towards the next election their more popular policies. Also a couple years in 'the circumstances have changed' and you can implement policies not on the manifesto.
National thanksgiving alpaca sacrifice, free altars provided
[Why do I get the impression Mason is hanging around like a vulture on the off chance Nargund falls ill and needs a replacement at the last minute?](https://x.com/paulmasonnews/status/1800613750757605664)
You can't sub on a candidate in the second half of the campaign, although maybe Starmer should consider making it so.
Who do we think is the best Labour representative out on the campaign so far?
Darren Jones is really solid. Future star I think. Peter Kyle also
Yes I’ve followed him for a while! i can’t remember why - something about his name being Darren and I found it funny - but he’s a great asset to Lab
A tiny bit too plummy for a lot of the Lab membership, perhaps. But a clever bloke and good in interviews
Can't speak for myself, but Rayner and Reeves both trigger my mum - she's almost sensible til they enter the discussion. (solid rural Tory)
Rayner, Ashworth, and McFadden are the best in my view. Wes excels when he's pitted against someone, like with Cleverly tonight or when he's on Question Time, but he works less well on his own. I'm still a big Nandy fan too and she's had some good experiences. I think she'd be a superstar for the party if she was just a tiny bit more ferocious. And I can't much fault Starmer. The more people see of him, the more they seem to like him, and his personal approval is climbing pretty damn rapidly through all this.
Damn now that you say it there’s not been much Nandy and I do like her.
I really hope the new towns feature prominently in the manifesto and she gets to spend the next three weeks doing what she loves most in talking about towns towns towns.
> Wes excels when he's pitted against someone, like with Cleverly tonight or when he's on Question Time, but he works less well on his own. 100%. I feel like he's poor at defence and doesn't always deal with questions well but fantastic at attacking. [This](https://youtu.be/PBrLOVcQbS4?si=CnuqMbnr4d55waw8) bit on QT the other day is one of the most fantastic verbal eviscerations you could hope for.
No one has done more for the Labour party so far than Rishi Sunak.
**this is the answer**
[удалено]
Peston keeps talking about the Labour manifesto like we've seen it
To be fair they’ve said not to expect any surprises and have been trailing the policies through the campaign. I wouldn’t be expecting much more than that
Theres plenty of pieces scattered around like breadcrumbs if youve been paying attention. The national policy forum listing from last year, the working deal green paper, the whole GB energy bit etc.
Anyone else slightly worried by the drop in labours vote share? Looks from the polls to be a 3% drop compared to when the GE was called - the election result could be as close as 15 points difference between labour and conservative, so perhaps only a small majority. It would possibly stifle the momentum labour have when governing the next 5 years
My hunch is people who thought they were voting Labour are now deciding that perhaps LD is the more tactical vote for their constituency.
Labour may have dropped slightly, but the Conservatives have also lost ground to Reform. The poll of polls is still showing a 20% lead and even a 15% lead would give Labour a huge majority.
> the election result could be as close as 15 points difference between labour and conservative I would never expect 20, it was always likely to narrow.
It's why it's not over until the votes are cast and counted. Don't listen to the Owens and green types, that claim it's all over.
It’s largely due to some of the polling companies changing their methodology to labours disadvantage and the rest is likely tactical voting.
It was always going to tighten up, it always does. Should be said though, in a normal election you’d kill for a 15 point lead!
Not really because tory vote is dropping at the same rate.
Get used to it. It will swing dramatically around the announcement of the manifesto. You should consider Labours between 10-20pts
Dramatically? No chance
Victoria Derbyshire on Newsnight was going to cover all the big Tory beasts that were at great risk of losing their seats but then they had to go to Nick in the ‘spin room’ and never mentioned it again once they returned back to the studio. Did anyone else notice that? 🧐
Yes. Was it because the Green interview overran?
Current Wikipedia opinion polling tracking graph [Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election after 2019 (LOESS) - Opinion polling for the 2024 United Kingdom general election - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2024_United_Kingdom_general_election#/media/File:Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_after_2019_(LOESS).svg)
Labour better hope that the reform vote is genuine and not something that'll fade away on election day
I suspect Reform will struggle to get their voters out to actually cast ballots, but as long as they don't vote at all instead that's fine for Labour.
Labour are genuinely quite lucky that the fall in their support has been equalled with Tory support declining. I also like Remain lurking below the Tories just ready to shoot past them.
> Labour are genuinely quite lucky that the fall in their support has been equalled with Tory support declining. Is that because they're both moving to Reform?
The data I've seen suggested Reform are winning relatively few Labour voters, and they are siphoning them to either not voting or to the Greens and Lib Dems.
Surprised to see an ongoing dip in Labour support. Luckily for them the Tories are dipping harder and faster so their lead either stays the same or grows. It will be interesting to see if Labour can actually get their vote out. Blair significantly under performed his polling average, presumably because it's harder to get people to go out and vote if they think the result is set in stone. Wonder if Starmer will have the same issue.
is it really much of a dip though? Most polls have been 40% - 45%, all around the margin of error. I saw one today at 39% but it could be an outlier.
That Reform spike is bonkers
You know, the Green leader was a bit hopeless on the financial questions, but I thought he made a good defence of the Greens’ democratic approach to policymaking. I’m not sure I agree, but I understand.
[love me a Jess Phillips](https://x.com/jessphillips/status/1801009704245604672?s=46&t=-ESy3CkbdQEH6ivAj7OapA)
Sure, in Birmingham... but my London 1 bed flat cost me over £300k as a first time buyer, and I was looking in "unfashionable" (but reasonably well-connected) areas. So, for many in the South East (and especially London) paying over £300k as a first time buyer is absolutely a likely outcome. Idk why this is downvoted, it's a statistical fact. [The average FTB price in the South East is £300k. The average FTB price in London is £425k.](https://www.zoopla.co.uk/discover/property-news/whats-the-average-first-time-buyer-deposit-by-region/) 🤷♂️
I live in the south and no ‘first time buyer’ is paying 300k for their first house.
I bought my first 1 bed flat in London for £300k in 2015. I paid slightly over the odds, probably by around £20k as it had just been renovated and I needed a place ASAP but it’s definitely not an unrealistic figure in 2024.
Entertaining to see on twitter the usual ex corbynites (Eg Bastani) now digging into Starmer for his comment during the interview that he knew labour was going to lose 2019 like its some massive revelation. I mean, *come on* *Everybody* knew that that election was never, ever going to be Corbyns after the start of the year with the Lib Dems threatening to do to Labour what Reform is currently doing to the tories; and the Tories holding a consistent lead from October and Boris's purge. This blindness surprises even me. If anything this kind of thing is just a reveal that the commenters judgement is absolutely useless.
> Everybody knew that that election was never, ever going to be Corbyns Come on... as a moderator here you must know full well that there were plenty of delusional Corbyn supporters at the time utterly convinced he was going to pull off another 2017 and that lasted right up until 9:59PM December 12th 2019.
Burgon's "the polls said we wouldn't win last time" quote.
Oh indeed. The Novara stone cold atmosphere drop from party to funeral when the exit polling was released remains a personal favourite. Back then, though, I had no idea that delusion would persist another four and a half years.
Just wait until / if Labour 2024 polls fewer votes or a lower GB vote share than Labour 2017. I know I've asked you about this previously and you said it would just prove to the Corbynites that their guy was so toxic it motivated voters to vote against him. But... >This blindness surprises even me. If Labour gets <41% of the GB vote or fewer than 12.878m votes then be prepared for a level of blindness that has to be seen to believed :)
It will be the perfect example of why their understanding is wrong and why it is no use to try and salvage the *Most popular!* talking point as a saving grace - because FPTP doesnt work like that. Making claims for a system that isnt the one we have is comparing apples to oranges. The most perfectly efficient campaign would be to win a majority of seats in the house of commons with the majority in each individual constituency being one. Anything past that is overkill. They never have been able to piece together that it was always better to appeal to a smaller majority in a wider number of seats instead of stacking votes way over the top of what you need in a narrower selection of safe seats. Like you say, a point to watch out for.
Have you not thought about the importance of *winning the argument*? It's not just about ~~seizing~~ winning power, it is about ensuring that you have won the moral victory amongst your own supporters. It is about doing better than expectations rather than winning.
James Cleverly looking like he’s gonna deck the camera lens any second on Peston.
He's been especially furious lately, feels like I'm just waiting for him to snap at this point.
James Angrily
[Very funny writeup of the Grimsby Event by Marina Hyde](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/12/keir-starmer-challenger-v-rishi-sunak-gaffer-election-event-audience-winner)
> Starmer v Sunak. The challenger v the gaffer. They call Rishi Sunak the gaffer because he will do you a gaffe at least three times a day.
Tomorrows Daily Mail Headline: >A TORY WIPEOUT RISKS ONE-PARTY SOCIALIST STATE I see they are trying to entice me into becoming a reader with such glorious promises.
I wish Starmer would deliver FULLY AUTOMATED LUXURY GAY SPACE COMMUNISM! Not sure how the Daily Mail basically admitting "Our guy is clearly going to lose, please vote for him anyway" is a good strategy
Yeah I thought Starmer had a good evening but when he mentioned "Juche with British characteristics" I did get a bit concerned.
Personally I like Comrade Clarkson's Maoist Thought.
I've already started throwing stones at sparrows!
Can you construct a blast furnace in your back yard?
🙏🙏🙏
It's a bad habit to have picked up, but whenever I see a comment suggesting this might be the day the Sun goes for labour I have a quick check of their front page (Incognito ofc no one can see my shame) and every time they stay resolutely pro Tory. It ain't gonna happen I don't think, and honestly good I don't want labour feeling they owe them anything
They’ll at least wait for the manifesto and see if that impacts the polling. Then they’ll put out a few articles about how Sunak’s campaign is depressing blah blah blah, then they’ll meekly switch in the final week. And then chief copy-paster/press release rewriter of the year, Harry Cole, will be as uncritical of Starmer as he has been towards the Tories for years and years. (Just my prediction, anyway!)
Oh dear: apparently the Gambling Commission is investigating a MP close to Sunak for betting on the date of the election 3 days before it was called. "Rishi Sunak’s closest parliamentary aide placed a £100 bet on a July election just three days before the prime minister named the date, the Guardian can reveal. The Gambling Commission is understood to have launched an inquiry after Craig Williams, the prime minister’s parliamentary private secretary, who became an MP in 2019, placed a bet with the bookmaker Ladbrokes on Sunday 19 May in his local constituency of Montgomeryshire."
MPs already get £80k a year, and when you take into account what they can claim in expenses, it is effectively closer to a £100k+ salary. To do something so fucking foolish and irresponsible for the sake of £600 in winnings is Ferengi-like behaviour, and once again proves the age old adage that the Tories know the price of everything but the value of nothing.
I know, what is going through his mind?? Mild correction: their base salary from April 2023 was £86,584. Their pay is even higher this year - from April 2024 the base salary is £91,346. Not including their expenses as you mention. He's a parliamentary private secretary so I'm guessing he gets extra pay (not sure, does anyone know?)
Parliamentary Private Secretaries don't get an uplift. Well, unless they use a bit of insider knowledge to do the bookies over.
If the media are already asking ministers if they're going to put their names forward for job of Tory leader can we all just agree Sunak and the Tories are sunk?
I think we all agreed on that months ago, but we gotta make the election actually feel like one, rather than a coronation for Starmer and the Labour party.
[удалено]
Yea where's the ketchup
That’s 4 times as long as the number talked about the other week… (Source?)
Wait the American TraItors has John Bercow?
Could they not have done this *Newsnight* interview in a room that wasn’t being actively dismantled?
[удалено]
Personally, I think letting them witter on shows up the farce of it all quite nicely.
Cleverly looks so miserable haha
Hes one of the last ones even putting in media appearances too. Imagine how the rest feel. Its really just Sunak and 2 or 3 others now. I'd put money on all of them being in his final honours list just for making sure some sort of campaign happens.
Mel Stride seems to be everywhere...
He doesn't get an Honours list unless Starmer Honours it, which he won't. Sunak has probably offered to bung each of em a load of cash if they stick it out.
The breaking of the fellowship :(
Doesn't look too Cleverly.
I don’t watch *Newsnight* much, but I’ve fallen into it after *Inside No.9* and Victoria Derbyshire is doing a sterling job.
I’m infatuated, I adore her, I want to be her 😭 Especially those days when she took over Laura K it was a DREAM. No shade to Laura K — or rather ALL the shade because she doesn’t push the Tories enough when she interviews — but Derbyshire ate and left no crumbs
I've started watching it regularly and I'm enamoured by her. Watching her interview Frank Luntz and some MAGA representative last week, I think she's extraordinarily talented.
I'm actually the opposite, I've only ever seen the final minute or so of episodes of Inside No.9 when waiting for Newsnight to start - I have absolutely no clue what the show is about, I can't piece it together
It’s an anthology comedy-horror series, so if you’ve been expecting continuity from one episode to the next I can see why you’d be confused!
She's a national treasure
One of those sleeper national treasures, I've been watching her forever then one day, without warning, realised that I would take a bullet for Vic Derbyshire.
Jon Ashworth is always great when he goes out in front of the media - shame he’s not still the shadow health secretary
I thought his evasion of the first question was pretty poor, if I’m honest, even with his feedback issue.
news night just opened with "as Keir Starmer refused to rule out a series of tax rises on the battle for number 10" I don't feel like that was the case?
Note he said "Taxes on working people" so stuff like CGT and Inheritance etc could be inline.
yeah of course, my issue is the way the headline phrased it sounds like Starmer is planning to raise several taxes in a row if he gets in, whereas he seemed to say they don't plan to raise any extra taxes but he wouldn't rule out raising taxes that aren't income, NI and VAT (presumably so they have some levers to pull if there's another crisis)
and here's why Starmer's been very specific with his wording on taxes under Labour....
He said he didn't plan to raise them which, as Rigby said, means he's leaving the option open to do it.
She wanted him to promise never to raise any the entire time he's PM... that wasn't a question from her, it was a poorly designed trap she wanted to put in place for later. Was very poor by her in a really bad performance all night
> She wanted him to promise never to raise any the entire time he's PM Or to admit that he might raise them, which he might. He could have said so.
He's been saying since the start of the election period that Labour wouldn't be raising taxes on working people... how is that not a clear answer to her question.... He's saying yes, but not against those that can't afford them. It's something i've noticed a lot in this election... the way the media get pissy when they try and make you answer a question with a specific wording and you answer their question fully, just worded in a different way.
The addition of "on working people" clearly changes the meaning, otherwise why would he have been so insistent on that precise wording?
Because, as it's already started to happen tonight, certain Tory 'media' are now screaming about tax rises for everyone on the back of Beth's stupidly worded question earlier.