The one and only UK 2024 election thread - July 4

[Sandstorm]

Sent off my postal vote today and voted specifically to get the current Conservative MP - who (together with our old MP who resigned in disgust of Boris' shit in 2021) has been here since about 2005 - out! "Anybody but the incumbents"!

If a White, South African immigrant in his 50s is unhappy with the Tories, then they're proper fucked!!

[Raggs]

The Getvoting website includes seat by seat recommendations for tactical voting with the reasons behind them, along with data on how many constituents could vote tactically.

GetVoting.org's recommendations are based on multilevel regression and poststratification (MRP) polling. Their recommendations include voting Labour in 370 seats, Lib Dem in 69, Green in three, SNP in seven, Plaid Cymru in two, and to “vote with your heart” in 181.

You can check their recommendations for your constituency here:

https://www.getvoting.org/tactical-voting/

I realise that their data comes from a proper polling company, but I tend to think that polls lose accuracy one you get to the regions. 42000 surveyed is good for a countrywide judgement, but it breaks down to an average of just 67 voters per constituency. Out of that 20 or so said they'd vote tactically.

The east wight primary vote wouldn't contain any reform or Tory voters, but was almost 1000 people. If those thousand actually follow through with the tactical vote (and I suspect most will), that's a fair old chunk of votes, when there's around 57k voters.

Especially as there's people like me who didn't vote in the poll but will be following the result.

Especially especially when about 51% of the vote is expected to go to Tory or reform.

51% ?

Yeah, according to the polling company, Lab is on about 33, Con on 32, Lib Dem on 0.73%, Reform on 19%, Green on 12.7%.

So if the reform nutters back the tory instead, we're staying tory. However, I think they'll split the vote, which gives other parties a slim chance. That really low Lib Dem figure also makes me a bit suspicious about the polling data quality.

I wouldn't be surprised if we stayed Tory to be honest, but I hope not.

[petej]

To be honest, the thing that kills volunteering is the sheer weight of regulatory requirements being pushed on to voluntary bodies. I probably end up doing over 100 hours of regulatory stuff for my cricket club a year, almost none of it having a practical use

If you're having to deal with it in your job you probably already want to punch people or headbutt your desk repeatedly.

Writing policy and regulations is hard and thankless even without a legal and services industry like ours constantly complicating and trying to monetise it.

[Slick]

If the social contract is maintained and people are able to feel economically secure, charity and volunteering occurs across the population at decent rates anyway. Or at least at rates where it's not necessary to mandate it.

That's where DavCam's "Big Society" fell down (if it were ever earnestly invoked), from austerity onwards they started ripping up the social contract. And by now they've not only torn it to shreds, but they've burnt it to ashes and then pissed on those for good measure.

I think this is bang on, there are so many clubs and society's closing down or pulling back around here due to lack of volunteers who were turning people away 5 years ago

[Raggs]

If the social contract is maintained and people are able to feel economically secure, charity and volunteering occurs across the population at decent rates anyway. Or at least at rates where it's not necessary to mandate it.

That's where DavCam's "Big Society" fell down (if it were ever earnestly invoked), from austerity onwards they started ripping up the social contract. And by now they've not only torn it to shreds, but they've burnt it to ashes and then pissed on those for good measure.

I think this is bang on, there are so many clubs and society's closing down or pulling back around here due to lack of volunteers who were turning people away 5 years ago

At my minis rugby club, there were about 5 of us in the committee to finish the season, most of the work was done by 2 of them. We had a good push at the end of this season, and expanded it by a fair bit, and expanded to 3 power couples, rather than just me and my wife, probably increased the committee and "senior volunteers" by 7 or 8 people.

[Slick]

If the social contract is maintained and people are able to feel economically secure, charity and volunteering occurs across the population at decent rates anyway. Or at least at rates where it's not necessary to mandate it.

That's where DavCam's "Big Society" fell down (if it were ever earnestly invoked), from austerity onwards they started ripping up the social contract. And by now they've not only torn it to shreds, but they've burnt it to ashes and then pissed on those for good measure.

I think this is bang on, there are so many clubs and society's closing down or pulling back around here due to lack of volunteers who were turning people away 5 years ago

At my minis rugby club, there were about 5 of us in the committee to finish the season, most of the work was done by 2 of them. We had a good push at the end of this season, and expanded it by a fair bit, and expanded to 3 power couples, rather than just me and my wife, probably increased the committee and "senior volunteers" by 7 or 8 people.

Yes, fair enough, our rugby club doesn't have a shortage of volunteers either, but the school, cubs, scouts, brownies etc around here have all had a massive fall in numbers.

[Raggs]

Yes, fair enough, our rugby club doesn't have a shortage of volunteers either, but the school, cubs, scouts, brownies etc around here have all had a massive fall in numbers.

We've really had to push it, we didn't have too many but realised that it's really not sustainable as it stands, people stop volunteering because they get overwhelmed. Hopefully, whilst the main people will still be working hard, the secondary tasks that aren't really part of their "job" description, will hopefully get handed off.

[tabascoboy]

It's been discussed before I know, but:

Are Conservative voters literally 'dying out'?

ITV News UK Editor Paul Brand explores how age has become a defining factor in predicting how people will vote in the upcoming General Election

As in every election, an extortionate amount of money is being spent right now by political parties and pollsters trying to work out how you’ll vote on polling day.

And yet there is a far cheaper way of having a good guess - all I need to ask is how old you are.

In fact, age has quickly become one of the most obvious ways to gauge someone’s political opinions these days, so much so that it is now arguably the most defining divide among the electorate.

In our Fight for ’24 series, we are looking at the people and places that are key to winning this election, and never before has there been such a yawning age gap in how different generations intend to vote.

Drawing on exclusive data and analysis provided to us by the British Election Study, you can see how rapidly the oldest and youngest age groups have diverged over the past 20 years.

We’ve tracked support for the various parties among two groups: 18-30 year-olds and over 65 year-olds.


Ten years ago, the average age of a Conservative voter was 52, compared to 48 for those supporting Labour – quite a small difference.

But over the past decade, the average age of a Conservative voter has risen to 62, while the average age of Labour voters has barely changed.

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-06-20/are ... -dying-out

[_Os_]

Election campaign from hell update ...

Mercer is claiming a Labour candidate who is a military veteran is lying about his service, it seems incredibly unlikely there are any lies, his service was in special forces and he cannot talk about it without breaking the law. Mercer looks to have decided to take free hits on a man who cannot legally defend himself.

"Attacking military veterans" was not something I expected from any party. It's crazy this has become a minor Tory theme. It's like they've looked at their constituency and thought "which of you haven't we attacked yet? Business owners and farmers, we've done our best to cripple you. Pensioners, we've got started on you by collapsing the NHS. Military veterans!".

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Sent off my postal vote today and voted specifically to get the current Conservative MP - who (together with our old MP who resigned in disgust of Boris' shit in 2021) has been here since about 2005 - out! "Anybody but the incumbents"!

If a White, South African immigrant in his 50s is unhappy with the Tories, then they're proper fucked!!

If a rugby message board is populated by people hugely fed up with them they're fecked.

[geordie_6]

Election campaign from hell update ...

Mercer is claiming a Labour candidate who is a military veteran is lying about his service, it seems incredibly unlikely there are any lies, his service was in special forces and he cannot talk about it without breaking the law. Mercer looks to have decided to take free hits on a man who cannot legally defend himself.

"Attacking military veterans" was not something I expected from any party. It's crazy this has become a minor Tory theme. It's like they've looked at their constituency and thought "which of you haven't we attacked yet? Business owners and farmers, we've done our best to cripple you. Pensioners, we've got started on you by collapsing the NHS. Military veterans!".

Bullshit spouted by the bloody Veterans Minister no less...

[_Os_]

He's still going. The Tory election campaign is totally out of control, there's no direction or message discipline.

They've ended up looking bad on D-Day, then followed it up by attacking a Labour candidate (who is a veteran) fund raising for veteran's charities, then questioning the service of another Labour candidate. The more they do this the more it cuts through. This is not the conversation any party should want to be in 2 weeks from an election, there is no win from being in this conversation.

[_Os_]

There's enough veterans on here to confirm if this is accurate. Here's what it looks like (I have limited/no knowledge in this area):

F Coy Royal Marines is in the Special Forces Support Group. Members of the SBS are publicly named as Royal Marines. The acknowledgment letter the Labour candidate has is signed by the commanding officer of the Special forces Support Group, a similar letter for an ordinary Royal Marine would've been signed by a regular Royal Marine officer. Special forces cannot disclose what operations they've been on and their service medals aren't public either. A serving captain in the UK special forces is highly likely to have seen combat over the last decade.

Does that all look accurate?

If it is accurate, then Mercer knows it all too and is accusing someone of stolen valour when he knows that's incredibly unlikely to be true.

[Paddington Bear]

To be honest, the thing that kills volunteering is the sheer weight of regulatory requirements being pushed on to voluntary bodies. I probably end up doing over 100 hours of regulatory stuff for my cricket club a year, almost none of it having a practical use

If you're having to deal with it in your job you probably already want to punch people or headbutt your desk repeatedly.

Writing policy and regulations is hard and thankless even without a legal and services industry like ours constantly complicating and trying to monetise it.

The ECB have over 700 paid staff (I believe that around 400 work in corporate style roles) and yet I am the one who has to do the regulatory stuff, madness. I understand the same is true at the RFU.

Which leads me to my controversial view that there’s little point funding the voluntary sector, all the governing bodies do with the cash is hire people who then force volunteers to do their jobs, having reduced the pot available massively.

[epwc]

If a rugby message board is populated by people hugely fed up with them they're fecked.

True

[Sandstorm]

There's enough veterans on here to confirm if this is accurate. Here's what it looks like (I have limited/no knowledge in this area):

F Coy Royal Marines is in the Special Forces Support Group. Members of the SBS are publicly named as Royal Marines. The acknowledgment letter the Labour candidate has is signed by the commanding officer of the Special forces Support Group, a similar letter for an ordinary Royal Marine would've been signed by a regular Royal Marine officer. Special forces cannot disclose what operations they've been on and their service medals aren't public either. A serving captain in the UK special forces is highly likely to have seen combat over the last decade.

Does that all look accurate?

If it is accurate, then Mercer knows it all too and is accusing someone of stolen valour when he knows that's incredibly unlikely to be true.

DAC will post from experience in a minute.

[epwc]

DAC will post from experience in a minute.

He’s too busy vetting reform candidates, just making sure they’re on the right side of rancid

[Jock42]

There's enough veterans on here to confirm if this is accurate. Here's what it looks like (I have limited/no knowledge in this area):

F Coy Royal Marines is in the Special Forces Support Group. Members of the SBS are publicly named as Royal Marines. The acknowledgment letter the Labour candidate has is signed by the commanding officer of the Special forces Support Group, a similar letter for an ordinary Royal Marine would've been signed by a regular Royal Marine officer. Special forces cannot disclose what operations they've been on and their service medals aren't public either. A serving captain in the UK special forces is highly likely to have seen combat over the last decade.

Does that all look accurate?

If it is accurate, then Mercer knows it all too and is accusing someone of stolen valour when he knows that's incredibly unlikely to be true.

SFSG aren't SF. SBS are Tri-Service these days (although predominantly RM) so I'm not sure exactly how they'd be referred to but it's fair to assume a RM would still be referred to as that. It's still possible that as SFSG he'd have been on ops that are sensitive, they took over the Close Observation role in NI for example. From what I recall he has previously claimed he'd seen combat and has rowed back a bit from that but could be mistaken.

[C69]

I realise that their data comes from a proper polling company, but I tend to think that polls lose accuracy one you get to the regions. 42000 surveyed is good for a countrywide judgement, but it breaks down to an average of just 67 voters per constituency. Out of that 20 or so said they'd vote tactically.

The east wight primary vote wouldn't contain any reform or Tory voters, but was almost 1000 people. If those thousand actually follow through with the tactical vote (and I suspect most will), that's a fair old chunk of votes, when there's around 57k voters.

Especially as there's people like me who didn't vote in the poll but will be following the result.

Especially especially when about 51% of the vote is expected to go to Tory or reform.

51% ?

Yeah, according to the polling company, Lab is on about 33, Con on 32, Lib Dem on 0.73%, Reform on 19%, Green on 12.7%.

So if the reform nutters back the tory instead, we're staying tory. However, I think they'll split the vote, which gives other parties a slim chance. That really low Lib Dem figure also makes me a bit suspicious about the polling data quality.

I wouldn't be surprised if we stayed Tory to be honest, but I hope not.

Sorry misread thought you meant nationally

[Slick]

If true, I think this could have a very big impact

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ar ... SApp_Other

SNP MSP’s using Holyrood expenses to pay for SNP MP’s GE expenses

Edit: I received a posted letter from our local SNP candidate yesterday, who’s office is literally 20m from our front gate, and my first thought was “I thought he was skint” as he’s been crowdfunding, fairly unsuccessfully.

[Hal Jordan]

Farage doing his best work for Putin over Ukraine, what a cunt.

[Sandstorm]

Farage doing his best work for Putin over Ukraine, what a cunt.

+ 1 000 000

[geordie_6]

Farage doing his best work for Putin over Ukraine, what a cunt.

Was a predictable, yet painful read. He isn't even bothering to try and mask it.

[C69]

Farage doing his best work for Putin over Ukraine, what a cunt.

Was a predictable, yet painful read. He isn't even bothering to try and mask it.

He is utterly bonkers

[petej]

Farage doing his best work for Putin over Ukraine, what a cunt.

Was a predictable, yet painful read. He isn't even bothering to try and mask it.

He is utterly bonkers

Putin is the world leader he admires most.

[dpedin]

Was a predictable, yet painful read. He isn't even bothering to try and mask it.

He is utterly bonkers

Putin is the world leader he admires most.

Putin is Farage's funder and boss! It is no surprise that Farage is trying hard to shift public perception against NATO/Ukraine and pro Russian. Putin pays his bills and no doubt has some kompromat on him too?

[tabascoboy]

Was a predictable, yet painful read. He isn't even bothering to try and mask it.

He is utterly bonkers

Putin is the world leader he admires most.

Followed by Kim Jong Un?

[tabascoboy]

Well f*ck me gently with a chainsaw

Reform UK's tax plans disproportionately benefit high earners, analysis shows

Nigel Farage previously maintained that people on lower incomes would benefit more than those on higher incomes when the tax cuts were viewed as a proportion of their total salary.



https://news.sky.com/story/reform-uks-t ... s-13156776

[robmatic]

Farage doing his best work for Putin over Ukraine, what a cunt.

He's also communicating with his own voters, who are pro-fascist, anti-liberal West.

[epwc]

Not sure if this has been posted before but another one under investigation now:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c511nv3pjd6o

[tabascoboy]

Aide to home secretary says Rwanda scheme is 'crap'

A Conservative parliamentary candidate and aide to Home Secretary James Cleverly has described the government's flagship Rwanda immigration policy as "crap".

James Sunderland, who was the MP for Bracknell from 2019 to 2024 and is running to represent the constituency again, was recorded expressing the view at a private event in April. In the recording, passed to the BBC, he is heard to say: "The policy is crap, OK? It’s crap." He goes on to defend the plan, saying it will deter migrants from trying to enter the UK by crossing the Channel. "It’s not about the policy. It’s about the effect of the policy," he says.

Mr Sunderland was speaking on 2 April at an event for Young Conservatives organised by a group called the True Blue Patrons Supper Club and titled: "What’s it like behind the scenes at the Home Office".

He has been a parliamentary private secretary to both Mr Cleverly and Suella Braverman. Mr Sunderland is heard to say: "I have been part of this for the last two years, and I’m immersed in it and I probably shouldn’t’ say too much. "What I would say to you is that - nobody has got their cameras on, their phones - the policy is crap, OK? It’s crap." He goes on to say: "But it’s not about the policy. It’s about the effect of the policy. It’s the second- or third-order effects. "In Australia, for example, a similar policy had a devastating effect. There is no doubt at all that when those first flights take off that it will send such a shockwave across the Channel that the gangs will stop."

Mr Sunderland also criticises other colleagues for "courting controversy" and "polarising opinion". He said: "I’m not saying stupid things. I’m not on the front page of the newspaper. I’m doing my job. I can commend hard work. "If you go out and do what Jonathan Gullis does, or Brendan Clarke Smith, or Lee Anderson, go out and just court controversy, you polarise opinion. I don’t want that."

Mr Gullis and Mr Clarke Smith are both former Conservative MPs and current candidates for the party. Mr Anderson was previously a Conservative MP but in March defected to Reform UK, for whom he is standing again as a candidate.

Mr Sunderland told the BBC: "I am disappointed that I was recorded at a private event. I candidly answered questions. I was talking about the response to the policy. The policy itself is not the be all and end all but part of a wider response. "I never criticise colleagues publicly but was asked about the resignations of colleagues from party posts. I honestly answered that we do not need unnecessary rhetoric and division in public life."

A Conservative spokesperson said: "Not everyone will like this policy, but having an effective deterrent is the only way to stop the boats."

Labour's Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, said: “The Tories Rwanda scheme has been completely exposed as an extortionate and failing gimmick." She added: “The Tories have been running the Rwanda scheme for 2 years. They’ve sent Rwanda £300m and two volunteers. “When will the Tories come clean with the public and admit what they obviously say in private; that the Rwanda scheme is a complete con.”

In November, Mr Cleverly faced questions after reports claimed he had privately described the Rwanda scheme as “batshit”.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn440850elmo

[tabascoboy]

Farage doing his best work for Putin over Ukraine, what a cunt.

He's also communicating with his own voters, who are pro-fascist, anti-liberal West.

"I said I disliked him as a person, but I admired him as a political operator because he's managed to take control of running Russia," he replied.

By suppressing dissent and protests; harassing, intimidating, imprisoning and even probably complicit in murder of political opponents and industrialists. Running a sham democracy. Maintaining a gross disparity in wealth between the elite and the rest of the population. Even leaving aside war crimes and willingly turning many minority ethnic groups within his country into cannon fodder for he is to be "admired"?

Yes here is a person we really want to speak for the UK on the international stage...

[epwc]

Yes here is a person we really want to speak for the UK on the international stage...

Amazing, currently projected that 25% will vote Reform in my constituency

[tabascoboy]

Depressing but not very surprising

Nearly 40% of young people do not intend to vote in the general election, according to a shock poll.

The Techne survey for Independent Media revealed that a quarter of 18 to 34-year-olds say they have not even registered to vote less than two weeks before the country goes to the polls.

The findings have led to fears that the main political parties are failing to do enough to engage with young people.

According to the poll, just 57% of 18 to 34-year-olds say they are registered and will vote on July 4.

That compares with more than 80% of those aged between 35 and 64.

A further 17% of young people say they are registered but will not vote, while 22% are not registered and have no plans to do so.

That means a total of 39% of young people say they will not vote in the election.

By contrast, only 17% of 35 to 44-year-olds, 16% of 45 to 54-year-olds and 15% of 55 to 64-year-olds say they won’t vote.

“The problem is that 18 to 34-year-olds do not identify with any of the political parties or are particularly taken by the agenda.

“Another poll the other day by Savanta showed how young voters are abandoning the Labour Party.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ ... bcf74e9bc9

[sockwithaticket]

It's bit chicken and egg at this point. Political parties don't try to appeal to the younger members of the electorate because they don't vote as much as other age groups, so younger people don't vote and thus the parties see that they don't need to appeal to them in order to get elected and so on and so forth.

While political parties do need to better with their offering and present a hopeful future, a lot of younger voters need to get over themselves. I'm at the edge of that 18 - 34 age range now, but my experience down the years has generally been that too many let perfect be the enemy of good when selecting their allegiance and others are altogether too tuned out. Happy to have a vague whinge about politics in general, but mostly skip any level of engagement between polling days. There's also a lack of perspective on what a privilege it is to be able to vote in democratic elections both in terms of the history of the UK specifically and the wider world.

I'd be in favour of compulsory voting.

[tabascoboy]

I remember as a teen not giving a shit about politics at all ( like most I'd imagine), but on reaching 18 being able to vote suddenly seemed like a big deal and felt a true responsibility to vote ( plus it was in the middle of Thatcherism, which helped to establish some strong personal feelings on the issue!).

[lemonhead]

I remember as a teen not giving a shit about politics at all ( like most I'd imagine), but on reaching 18 being able to vote suddenly seemed like a big deal and felt a true responsibility to vote ( plus it was in the middle of Thatcherism, which helped to establish some strong personal feelings on the issue!).

All about putting in context. Adams should be a permanent part of the syllabus.

"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes. Of course."
"But why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard, the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"

[C69]

Voted postally

Merseyside to go fully red

[Insane_Homer]

The russian stooge, after confirming he's a russian stooge, is now upset that he's being called a russian stooge.

[Paddington Bear]

Depressing but not very surprising

Nearly 40% of young people do not intend to vote in the general election, according to a shock poll.

The Techne survey for Independent Media revealed that a quarter of 18 to 34-year-olds say they have not even registered to vote less than two weeks before the country goes to the polls.

The findings have led to fears that the main political parties are failing to do enough to engage with young people.

According to the poll, just 57% of 18 to 34-year-olds say they are registered and will vote on July 4.

That compares with more than 80% of those aged between 35 and 64.

A further 17% of young people say they are registered but will not vote, while 22% are not registered and have no plans to do so.

That means a total of 39% of young people say they will not vote in the election.

By contrast, only 17% of 35 to 44-year-olds, 16% of 45 to 54-year-olds and 15% of 55 to 64-year-olds say they won’t vote.

“The problem is that 18 to 34-year-olds do not identify with any of the political parties or are particularly taken by the agenda.

“Another poll the other day by Savanta showed how young voters are abandoning the Labour Party.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/ ... bcf74e9bc9

It’s fucking tedious - I’ve had chats with probably 4 or 5 people in their 20s over the last few weeks where they’ve said how fed up they are with the state of the country but had not bothered to register to vote.

It’s pathetic - it takes 5 minutes and voting itself much the same, if you can’t do that you deserve everything you get