Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[dgl]

The bug thing for me when comparing Sunak to Starmer is Starmer actually seems to act like an adult, Sunak is an adult in age only.

 

[jfollows]

Nope. He's said (paraphrasing) that he doesn't expect a May election. But when pressed as to if it was definitely off the table he declined to answer.

Today's media chatter appears to be about a November 14th. election date, following the party conferences.

 

[oldman]

Sunak is simply keeping his options open. If he suggests a May election is possible then the election campaign starts now, which he doesn't want, so he says it will be later. Of course, if he later decides to go for May, he will say it is in the national interest to end the uncertainty. It's been done before.

Personally I think it will be May - a 'tax-cutting' budget, before the peak Channel boat season, energy price cap falling in April, and less chance of some unpredictable crisis messing things up.

 

[jfollows]

Personally I think it will be May - a 'tax-cutting' budget, before the peak Channel boat season, energy price cap falling in April, and less chance of some unpredictable crisis messing things up.

I think you're unfairly crediting them with being rational about this - I think they'll go long and late because they'll always be hoping for "something" to improve their likely prospects, which simply won't happen, and I think that they'll call the election in the end before they completely run out of time to have no choice in the date any more. My £10 bet on January 2025 is unlikely to win, I realise, but I think in May they'll be faffing around still and coming up with reasons to wait longer.
However, that's based on my feelings and emotions as much as anything. You may well be right!

 

[edwin_m]

I think you're unfairly crediting them with being rational about this - I think they'll go long and late because they'll always be hoping for "something" to improve their likely prospects, which simply won't happen, and I think that they'll call the election in the end before they completely run out of time to have no choice in the date any more. My £10 bet on January 2025 is unlikely to win, I realise, but I think in May they'll be faffing around still and coming up with reasons to wait longer.
However, that's based on my feelings and emotions as much as anything. You may well be right!

Another reason may be the hope of wrong-footing Labour by announcing a May election at shortest possible notice when they think nobody is expecting one. However Labour have probably rumbled that one already.

 

[3141]

Sunak is simply keeping his options open. If he suggests a May election is possible then the election campaign starts now, which he doesn't want, so he says it will be later. Of course, if he later decides to go for May, he will say it is in the national interest to end the uncertainty. It's been done before.

Personally I think it will be May - a 'tax-cutting' budget, before the peak Channel boat season, energy price cap falling in April, and less chance of some unpredictable crisis messing things up.

That seems the likeliest outcome to me as well. The longer he holds off, the more likelihood there is of some new issue arising to scupper his chances even more. Keep on postponing it till the last possible moment and there's no room left for any manoeuvre, even if the Conservatives' prospects have become even more bleak than they are today.

I guess the other parties are developing (or already have) a series of contingency plans for every possible election time.

 

[Blindtraveler]

But even if he does wait until the end of the year and finds the waters a little bumpy, he is still got some breathing room to go as legally doesn't have to be called until 2025, I agree it would probably be in his interest to do it sooner rather than later but as I've said elsewhere I think he's hoping that we can get inflation below 5% and possibly closer to three and maybe some forward movement on the energy situation as well before calling it as those are two of the big things that he'll be saying that these done and giving as reasons why we should give him another chance

 

[sor]

Another reason may be the hope of wrong-footing Labour by announcing a May election at shortest possible notice when they think nobody is expecting one. However Labour have probably rumbled that one already.

Though the tories vociferously complained about it at the time, they've presumably forgotten that Labour hired Sue Gray away from the civil service and she probably knows a thing or two about Tory tactics

The other parties will be spinning up their campaign machines anyway, as there are already various elections going on in May - PCCs for England and Wales, mayoral elections in a few places, local elections all over the place. (which is why it's even more insane that the Tories are seriously considering breaking the convention of holding the general election on the same date)

 

[Gloster]

This is why I think that he may well consider a snap election in early April. The other parties will, he would hope, be taken up with preparing for all the known May elections and a possible General Election the same month, so he will quietly prepare and then hit them with a surprise short notice election. The other parties can’t prepare for everything, but in a short campaign they have little time to catch up.

One thing that has changed is that many of the old methods for preparing for elections: booking advertising hoardings, reserving newspaper space, preparing leaflets, etc. are less important than they were and can probably be disguised as being for the local elections. The Internet is the medium and a lot can be quietly prepared in advance.

Sunak will still be making some preparations for the local, mayoral and so on elections but might be hoping to go into them on a roll. Win the General Election and a lot of supporters who might not have bothered will come out at the locals.

Of course, this all presumes that Sunak has a considered plan. He may just be, as so often, just reacting to events.

 

[Thirteen]

January 2025 Election is not happening for a multitude of reasons. I do wonder how badly things will go in May with both local and Mayoral.

 

[Acfb]

I think it's possible/likely they will hold the Tees Valley Mayor and maybe even the West Midlands one but things are likely to be nearly/as bad as 2023 elsewhere I think.

 

[dosxuk]

This is why I think that he may well consider a snap election in early April. The other parties will, he would hope, be taken up with preparing for all the known May elections and a possible General Election the same month, so he will quietly prepare and then hit them with a surprise short notice election. The other parties can’t prepare for everything, but in a short campaign they have little time to catch up.

I'd be amazed if the main parties haven't had election campaigns basically ready to go all the way back to when Boris was starting to look a bit ropey.

 

[Blindtraveler]

I think it's possible/likely they will hold the Tees Valley Mayor and maybe even the West Midlands one but things are likely to be nearly/as bad as 2023 elsewhere I think.

If they don't win in London even by the skin of their teeth I'll be surprised

 

[Busaholic]

Another reason may be the hope of wrong-footing Labour by announcing a May election at shortest possible notice when they think nobody is expecting one. However Labour have probably rumbled that one already.

Presumably based on the ultra-successful example provided by Theresa May in 2017? Actually, all joking aside, I think that's quite possible. To hold one after the local election results, which will surely be at the very least poor for the Tories, would only present an open goal for Labour to exploit, though whether they have the strikers to exploit it is open to question still.

 

[Purple Train]

Now this is interesting: Chris Skidmore has announced that he will be standing down next week and will trigger a by-election in Kingswood: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67895246

Conservative MP Chris Skidmore says he will stand down as an MP next week in protest at plans to issue more oil and gas licences.
The former minister said he was resigning as a Tory MP ahead of a vote on a bill on Monday that would guarantee annual licensing rounds.
The move will trigger a by-election in his Kingswood seat in Gloucestershire.
He added his constituents deserved a new MP after his "personal decision" not to continue as a Tory MP.

With a required swing of 11.4%, it is exactly the kind of seat Starmer needs to win in order to become Prime Minister - but it's being abolished at the General Election, with bits going into Filton and Bradley Stoke, the re-established Bristol North East, and Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg's seat (renamed to North East Somerset and Hanham).

 

[nw1]

Now this is interesting: Chris Skidmore has announced that he will be standing down next week and will trigger a by-election in Kingswood: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-67895246

With a required swing of 11.4%, it is exactly the kind of seat Starmer needs to win in order to become Prime Minister - but it's being abolished at the General Election, with bits going into Filton and Bradley Stoke, the re-established Bristol North East, and Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg's seat (renamed to North East Somerset and Hanham).

Given they've taken Tamworth and Mid Beds I think they'll easily take Kingswood.

Presumably Bristol NE is the natural successor seat, so the new Labour MP (presuming they do win and some strange Uxbridge factor isn't at play locally) will then contest that one.

 

[telstarbox]

If they don't win in London even by the skin of their teeth I'll be surprised

The polls suggest otherwise.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If they don't win in London even by the skin of their teeth I'll be surprised

I would say the Tories have no chance whatsoever of winning the Mayor in London. Even allowing for that they seem to be doing better in outer London boroughs than elsewhere in the country (partly due to ULEZ), London is already too strongly Labour.

 

[Thirteen]

I would say the Tories have no chance whatsoever of winning the Mayor in London. Even allowing for that they seem to be doing better in outer London boroughs than elsewhere in the country (partly due to ULEZ), London is already too strongly Labour.

A more moderate Tory candidate might have done well but Susan Hall is too much of a loose cannon for the rest of London to come close to winning.

 

[bspahh]

I would say the Tories have no chance whatsoever of winning the Mayor in London. Even allowing for that they seem to be doing better in outer London boroughs than elsewhere in the country (partly due to ULEZ), London is already too strongly Labour.

At Oddschecker it says that the odds for Khan to be the next London mayor are 3/10, and 7/1 for Hall, so a £10 bet would win you £3 or £70, with your stake back.

 

[brad465]

This is why I think that he may well consider a snap election in early April. The other parties will, he would hope, be taken up with preparing for all the known May elections and a possible General Election the same month, so he will quietly prepare and then hit them with a surprise short notice election. The other parties can’t prepare for everything, but in a short campaign they have little time to catch up.

He might now call one then to prevent now 2 damaging by-elections from taking place (technically 3 if Scott Benton is recalled but that'll probably take too long).

 

[PGAT]

At Oddschecker it says that the odds for Khan to be the next London mayor are 3/10, and 7/1 for Hall, so a £10 bet would win you £3 or £70, with your stake back.

I cannot imagine this is a reliable source

 

[SuspectUsual]

But even if he does wait until the end of the year and finds the waters a little bumpy, he is still got some breathing room to go as legally doesn't have to be called until 2025, I agree it would probably be in his interest to do it sooner rather than later but as I've said elsewhere I think he's hoping that we can get inflation below 5% and possibly closer to three and maybe some forward movement on the energy situation as well before calling it as those are two of the big things that he'll be saying that these done and giving as reasons why we should give him another chance

Both of which are largely outside his control.

 

[Acfb]

Given they've taken Tamworth and Mid Beds I think they'll easily take Kingswood.

Presumably Bristol NE is the natural successor seat, so the new Labour MP (presuming they do win and some strange Uxbridge factor isn't at play locally) will then contest that one.

Yes Kingswood would be really interesting. Labour needs a big win and then Rees Mogg will also be worried as part of Kingswood gets merged with his redrawn seat (Somerset NE and Hanham, even though it has a 30% majority on paper).

I don't know if a by election will take place though. Gordon Brown avoided a by election in NW Leicestershire altogether in early 2010 for several months.

 

[bspahh]

I cannot imagine this is a reliable source

Its the wisdom of crowds. If you know better, you can make some money (I don't).

 

[Enthusiast]

At Oddschecker it says that the odds for Khan to be the next London mayor are 3/10, and 7/1 for Hall, so a £10 bet would win you £3 or £70, with your stake back.

If those odds are correct I should hotfoot it down to your local bookies and have some. Assuming you ignore the possibility of any other candidate winning, a bet on each at those odds will give you a healthy 11% profit:

£77 @ 3/10 will net you £100 (and ten pence).
£12.50 @ 7/1 will net you £100

So, £89.50 invested, £100 guaranteed return. Better than the Nationwide!

Of course you could always take a real punt and just invest £100 at 3/10 on Mr Khan and make an (almost guaranteed) 30%. But I couldn't possibly countenance gambling!

 

[bspahh]

If those odds are correct I should hotfoot it down to your local bookies and have some. Assuming you ignore the possibility of any other candidate winning, a bet on each at those odds will give you a healthy 11% profit:

£77 @ 3/10 will net you £100 (and ten pence).
£12.50 @ 7/1 will net you £100

So, £89.50 invested, £100 guaranteed return. Better than the Nationwide!

Of course you could always take a real punt and just invest £100 at 3/10 on Mr Khan and make an (almost guaranteed) 30%. But I couldn't possibly countenance gambling!

There are two ways to get a guaranteed return from betting. One is to be the bookie. The other is to use free/cheap bets from their marketing budget. With those you can pick events with 2 outcomes (tennis, darts are snooker are good as you can only win or lose and there are no draws). Then place bets on both outcomes. You can then pick which match to bet on to get a guaranteed profit, whatever happens, or to pick one side and get a bigger profit one way, and get your stake back if you don't pick the right one.

Personally, I use the betting companies to get a view for the overall market on what is likely to happen. The bookies will adjust the odds so they end up with a similar exposure whatever happens.

 

[Enthusiast]

There are two ways to get a guaranteed return from betting. One is to be the bookie. The other is to use free/cheap bets from their marketing budget.

If those odds are correct, my method is as near to guaranteed as you can get (assuming you believe nobody other than the Labour or Tory candidate will succeed). In fact you could include a 25/1 shot as well and still be more than 6% up. That's why I think either those odds are incorrect or they are taken from more than one bookmaker.

 

[baz962]

If those odds are correct I should hotfoot it down to your local bookies and have some. Assuming you ignore the possibility of any other candidate winning, a bet on each at those odds will give you a healthy 11% profit:

£77 @ 3/10 will net you £100 (and ten pence).
£12.50 @ 7/1 will net you £100

So, £89.50 invested, £100 guaranteed return. Better than the Nationwide!

Of course you could always take a real punt and just invest £100 at 3/10 on Mr Khan and make an (almost guaranteed) 30%. But I couldn't possibly countenance gambling!

Do you think it will be only one of these two to win

 

[bspahh]

If those odds are correct, my method is as near to guaranteed as you can get (assuming you believe nobody other than the Labour or Tory candidate will succeed). In fact you could include a 25/1 shot as well and still be more than 6% up. That's why I think either those odds are incorrect or they are taken from more than one bookmaker.

The 30/100 for Sadiq Khan is from https://betway.com/en/sports/evt/12041168

You can get 7/1 for Susan Hall from https://www.paddypower.com/politics/uk-london-mayoral-election

You can make a little money with bookies with arbitrage between different companies. You can make a bit more if you use promotional free bets.

Bookies are not charities. They offer free bets to attract business, where they hope to get some people with an addictive personality, where they can make lots of profit. If you have an addictive personality, then I think you would be better to not get involved with gambling.

Betting is a way of managing risk. So is insurance. When you take out buildings insurance, its like placing a bet with the insurance company that your house is going to burn down.

You can also use betting to manage the risk of getting a government you don't like. Bet against the party that you want to win an election, you can then win some money, or get a government that you agree with.

At the moment, you get better odds for Rishi Sunak's "Exit Date" to be in 2024 (10/11) than 2025 or later (5/4). I'm not sure if that is as prime minister, Conservative party leader, MP or UK citizen.