David Herdson

Although worth noting that George III was neither power-mad nor a despot.

Unlike men such as Washington and Jefferson, he didn't own slaves.

Well, apart from it being the clear context of Election Maps post at the head of the thread, votes cast are what decide elections.

There *is* a certain sort of consistency there though?

Two consistencies actually, if we count his ignorance as well.

Not in real voting intention polls.

Also the Greens, though their support is too broad-but-thin mostly to translate into seats yet. But a party in double-figures can't be ignored.

If the Tories do drop to fourth or worse, that creates an interesting question for the Lib Dems with the marginally right-of-centre going uncontested.

Probably a mix of campaign dynamics, a national collapse in the Labour vote, as well as tactical voting. I'm assuming the Greens and Labour didn't campaign hard where as the Lib Dems did.

That said, I disagree about the threat of Reform. General elections work differently from local by-elections.

One of the main reasons I joined the Lib Dems immediately after the last general election was that I foresaw precisely this dynamic Rob describes below, and wanted to play my part in a political battle with a deep ideological divide and where who wins matters enormously.

That said, I dislike awarding the Prize for anything other than achievements already banked. It's for others - the American people above all - to control Trump's future actions.

Trump is far more interested in peace than in justice. Yes, he wants the prize (mainly because it infuriates him that Obama has one and he doesn't), but his comfort zone is real estate development. That's where his grift is and he wants peace because it allows him to make money.

However, critics are warning that the planned liberalisation of the alcohol licensing regime in England and Wales will erode local councils’ right to decide on opening hours, hand the drink industry unprecedented power and limit the ability of people affected by late night openings to object.

Where's the downside? www.theguardian.com/business/202...

I get the impression that they're not very keen on awarding a Prize to Trump?

That said, if he can make a lasting peace (and a peace of equals) in Palestine, well, there've been less-worthy recipients. A very, very long way to go before that though.

Meanwhile, France still doesn't have a government and that of the US is well into its second week of shutdown.

Just in case what would once have been dominating international news stories are passing us by.

The 2020s, eh?

To be convincing you need to sound convincing; you need to sound as if you're convinced yourself.

Passion always helps in that regard but so too does a robust argument that can be made from first principles.

But those principles have to be grounded. Too often, at the moment, Labour's aren't.

Britain is so vulnerable to its institutions being politicised because it's never needed to protect against it in the modern era; the guardrails have been primarily norms, standards and culture that all sides have abided by (because they work).

Timely study and article.

Ha. Well, there is that.

But I do think the Greens will get more in future than they are at the moment, if only because of the right-wing bias of social and print media, and Polanski's colourful past.

I think this is the highest-ever Green share of the vote in a UK / GB poll.

Even more notable that they're only two points off second.

FWIW, I don't think they're ready for the level of scrutiny that would come with that kind of performance. A lot of people see what they want to with the Greens.

1/7 Why is Ukraine still winning and Russia still losing the war?

This thread lists a few key facts that Putin would prefer you forget

Abolishing stamp duty won't make housing costs cheaper.

With a supply deficit, buyers bid up prices constrained only by affordability. Reduced costs in one area will inflate another.

But it would be a further transfer from the young to the elderly / middle-aged.

Instead: build more.

Oh and they're going to abolish stamp duty and business rates for high streets and triple stop and search....

I reckon we're well over £20 billion of committments here.

You can't. But their influence will be felt within parliament and how other parties (who voters in Reading or Liverpool can support) interact with them matters.

I agree. That's the purpose of the formula I suggest, which ofcom and the like could adopt.

One issue with the 5% rule, if applied alone, is it cuts off regional parties. The SNP wouldn't qualify even if they were about to return 50+ MPs (as they might be).

Fine in theory but there are hundreds of registered parties. Where do you draw the line?

I do think it's fair that the parties get proportionate coverage. Those most likely to form, participate in or influence governments should get most scrutiny and visibility.

I agree.

I sketched out a formula a little while ago that I think would work in the interim. Three equal parts: vote share last election, MPs last election, poll share now.

You'd probably need to give poll share greater weight in an election but I'd still keep an element of the other two.

Yes, well, it's much the same formula of 'it's all someone else's fault' + 'break things' + 'only we truly represent the nation'.

Yes. It's extraordinary that after all the scandals of the SNP these last few years - not to mention how the effects of leaving a lesser Union have become obvious - that the nationalists are so far clear. But there we are: on for another landslide.

Wouldn't a civil servant be more likely to say something like "you do realise, minister, that if you do this then you'll be cutting this much from these councils?"

It's not for civil servants to say policy options are good or bad: merely to imply it through the likely consequences.

It's a stupid argument from Jenrick's supporters.

Never say or write anything in private that you wouldn't be prepared to justify if it became public. It's a good rule in general; it's a better rule for those in the public eye.

If you can't see how this will end, then you're not paying attention (not least to what's going on on the other side of the Atlantic).

If it is, that's only a perception at a national level - there was a lot of very good policy that came out of the Lib Dem conference.

But it's certainly possible. That is the local image and the one most voters will see.

Is that second one a line-out put in? Looks more like a football throw-in but then it's a big (and presumably pretty heavy) pumpkin!