General Election Pre-Thread (6 of 6)

[blandy]

1 minute ago, chrisp65 said:

6 days to go and suddenly, the fields around town have filled with tory placards.

Must have been the recent rainfall, then a sunny spell....and all the fertiliser.

Meanwhile I've been inundated with a Tory leaflet, twice as big as the ones from the other three. I hope the recyclists don't put their back out.

[bickster]

I mean of course he will but its still a bloody stupid thing to say at this stage of the election cycle 

[blandy]

3 minutes ago, bickster said:

I mean of course he will but its still a bloody stupid thing to say at this stage of the election cycle 

Why? I like it on several levels.

Firstly (assuming he was asked or prompted) it's honest and answering a question/speaking truthfully.

Second, it opens up the same to be put to Sunak, which I guess it will be, and I guess it'll be harder for him to answer, without opening ups can of worms, like "so who should be your successor" exposing in-fighting and the absence of all the nobheads from appearing to campaign for the baby eaters.

[bickster]

Just now, blandy said:

Why? I like it on several levels.

Firstly (assuming he was asked or prompted) it's honest and answering a question/speaking truthfully.

Second, it opens up the same to be put to Sunak, which I guess it will be, and I guess it'll be harder for him to answer, without opening ups can of worms, like "so who should be your successor" exposing in-fighting and the absence of all the nobheads from appearing to campaign for the baby eaters.

Because it gives an encouragement for your opponents to vote tactically against your candidates. Tactically at this stage it's poor because an awful lot of Labour gains will be small majorities

Also is he really saying that if things go pear shaped in the run in (they won't), that he won't lead the party into a coalition / supply and confidence deal with another party? And that is the only question of this ilk that would actually matter. If he loses, he loses and yes he very likely resigns (because, he's not Corbyn), if he wins it's as irrelevant as him losing. 

 

[Davkaus]

He has 3 options, and answering a silly question with a simple honest answer is probably preferable to lying or refusing to answer. Absolutely a non issue, imo.

If he refused to answer, people will keep asking, this pretty much shuts that conversation down

[markavfc40]

The question Starmer was asked is 'If you lose the election, particularly badly, will you resign as Labour leader?' I wouldn't expect him to answer anything other than yes. The only other answer he could have given was no and would clearly have been absolute bollocks. In fairness it isn't even a story though is it as the chances of Starmer losing the election are pretty much zero. 

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, Wainy316 said:

I knew it!

I know. I deserve it

[bickster]

13 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

He has 3 options, and answering a silly question with a simple honest answer is probably preferable to lying or refusing to answer. Absolutely a non issue, imo.

If he refused to answer, people will keep asking, this pretty much shuts that conversation down

"With all due respect, I'm focusing on winning this election, beating the Tories and getting the job done (lolz). I'm not focusing on losing this election"

Yes its not answering the question but it also sends the right message

It is as said above a non-issue but its also a stupid thing to say

 

[The Fun Factory]

Sad to see Dr Richard Taylor has died, who was an independent MP for Wyre Forest between 2001 to 2010 on a platform opposing the emergency unit closure at Kidderminster Hospital. He also achieved the very rare distinction of getting re-elected as an independent.

[chrisp65]

The journos that don’t like actual politics and policies can now spend the next 2 days shouting ‘will you resign?’ at Sunak. he refuses to answer saying he’s concentrating on winning. Two days later he’s advised to say he would / wouldn’t and then the speculation can start on coups and Faragism and Johnson 2.0 the one nation rainbow alliance candidate. It’ll be 2 days of arguing and pitching for 2 unsuitable individuals neither of which is even a tory MP. With any luck, a couple of them will get those Andrea Leadsom tee shirts back out and march up and down Whitehall again.

I’m still hoping this election comes out on DVD.

 

 

[bickster]

For polling / stats nerds (link in second tweet)

 

[bickster]

For @Wainy316 from the above link, all the models predictions for your seat

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, bickster said:

Yes its not answering the question but it also sends the right message

We don't disagree on very much, ever, but here we do. Not answering the question is something viewers and voters hate. He won't lose badly, it's a hypothetical that will never come to be, so just do what people like, and answer the question with a "yes". That's the "right message". And like I said it also opens up the same being asked of Sunak, and if he's evasive, then that looks bad. If he's honest and also says yes, then like I say, it opens up "who should follow you?" because everyone believes he's gonna lose.

More broadly, I think he's good at the tactical, or strategic approach and terrible at the "give people hope" side of things. Angela Rayner seems to have been quite low key (not that I've followed that closely), but she's almost the opposite - really excellent at the "reasons to vote Labour" rather than "get them lot out" side of it. I guess they just want to stick to their people hate the tories, we don't need to say anything approach, but IMO, it's a shame really.

[Genie]

Starmer was asked if he’d quit if found guilty of breaking covid rules and said he would.

Rayner said she’d quit if found guilty of breaking the law around the tax due on her old house.

Starmer said he’d quit if he loses the election.

I think Rishi would have done his best to avoid answering comparable questions if put to him.

Starmer is being clear, consistent and honourable which is obviously a good thing (that has been lacking for a long time).

Edited June 28 by Genie

[ml1dch]

25 minutes ago, blandy said:

We don't disagree on very much, ever, but here we do. Not answering the question is something viewers and voters hate. He won't lose badly, it's a hypothetical that will never come to be, so just do what people like, and answer the question with a "yes". That's the "right message". And like I said it also opens up the same being asked of Sunak, and if he's evasive, then that looks bad. If he's honest and also says yes, then like I say, it opens up "who should follow you?" because everyone believes he's gonna lose.

More broadly, I think he's good at the tactical, or strategic approach and terrible at the "give people hope" side of things. Angela Rayner seems to have been quite low key (not that I've followed that closely), but she's almost the opposite - really excellent at the "reasons to vote Labour" rather than "get them lot out" side of it. I guess they just want to stick to their people hate the tories, we don't need to say anything approach, but IMO, it's a shame really.

Agreed with all this. It'll make no difference one way or the other, I reckon the people who are watching Starmer doing an interview on the news and saying he'll resign if Labour lose (like nearly every one of the main party leaders who lose an election tends to do) and will analyse that statement in any detail all decided who they were voting for years ago and it ain't changing now. 

It might seem weird, but I really don't think people really don't seem to know how massive next Friday looks like it's going to be. In here we've clearly been all over the polls for months if not years and any small event that moves them we analyse the life of it and know what all the stuff behind the numbers mean. Conversations that I've had in the real world seem to be more along the lines of "well it could still go either way, the polls always get it wrong, Labour vote never comes out and all the old Tories will still vote Tory, remember the local elections when they said it would be result in a hung parliament...".

Feels like most people who aren't tuned into 24/7 are expecting a Labour win, but nothing more than the bog standard, normal win. 

Edited June 28 by ml1dch

[bickster]

1 minute ago, ml1dch said:

It might seem weird, but I really don't think people really don't seem to know how massive next Friday looks like it's going to be. In here we've clearly been all over the polls for months if not years and any small event that moves them we analyse the life of it and know what all the stuff behind the numbers mean. Conversations that I've had in the real world seem to be more along the lines of "well it could still go either way, the polls always get it wrong, Labour vote never comes out and all the old Tories will still vote Tory, remember the local elections when they said it would be result in a hung parliament...".

Feels like most people who aren't tuned into 24/7 are expecting a Labour win, but nothing more than the bog standard, normal win. 

Yep, had a conversation with a customer only last week (which I tried to avoid), she was a sort of disengaged Labour voter. She thought I was a lunatic when I told her how big I thought Labour's majority would be and the historical record breaking event she will be witnessing. Thought I was absolutely mental 

[ml1dch]

10 minutes ago, bickster said:

Yep, had a conversation with a customer only last week (which I tried to avoid), she was a sort of disengaged Labour voter. She thought I was a lunatic when I told her how big I thought Labour's majority would be and the historical record breaking event she will be witnessing. Thought I was absolutely mental 

My daughter was asking in the car yesterday about all the election signs and why they were up - and my wife, while giving her the two paragraph overview of how our political system works, said something along the lines of "the next Prime Minister will definitely be Keir Starmer or Rishi Sunak, but at the moment nobody seems to know which one it will be". And she's a very bright person who watches about three hours of political news every day. I suppose it's possible she was being as balanced as possible for a nine year old audience, but it felt like she's been conditioned to expect these things to always be relatively close so this one will be as well.

I'm not going to mention anything until about ten minutes before the exit poll drops. 

[bickster]

5 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

My daughter was asking in the car yesterday about all the election signs and why they were up - and my wife, while giving her the two paragraph overview of how our political system works, said something along the lines of "the next Prime Minister will definitely be Keir Starmer or Rishi Sunak, but at the moment nobody seems to know which one it will be". And she's a very bright person who watches about three hours of political news every day. I suppose it's possible she was being as balanced as possible for a nine year old audience, but it felt like she's been conditioned to expect these things to always be relatively close so this one will be as well.

I'm not going to mention anything until about ten minutes before the exit poll drops. 

The other end of the mentalist scale is the amount of Reform loonies that actually think Farage is going to be the next PM "because something is happening" with added "the polls are just a conspiracy from the uniparty"

[bickster]

Just for amusement

11 constituencies. What links them?

• Arundel and South Downs
• Christchurch
• Hamble Valley
• Kingswinford and South Staffordshire
• Maldon
• New Forest East
• North East Hampshire
• North West Essex
• Sevenoaks
• South Shropshire
• Weald of Kent
   

[The Fun Factory]

14 minutes ago, bickster said:

Just for amusement

11 constituencies. What links them?

• Arundel and South Downs
• Christchurch
• Hamble Valley
• Kingswinford and South Staffordshire
• Maldon
• New Forest East
• North East Hampshire
• North West Essex
• Sevenoaks
• South Shropshire
• Weald of Kent
   

They are all quite white and old?