Professor Michael Thrasher on Sky News very pessimistic about Labour's performance and prospects for the next election. Doing well in Barnet and Wandsworth isn't enough he says.
Has everyone seen that there is a video of a naked Madison Cawthorn rubbing his bare "bits" on another man's face while groaning.
There's nothing wrong with that behaviour, as it's just two consenting adults, etc.
But I do find the way - in today's Republican Party - he's busy making possibly the least persuasive "I'm not gay, this is just a things guys do all the time" line I think I've ever heard.
BBC talking about how well LDs are doing - but surely key point is they only have 25 to 30 realistic targets at GE.
Con will surely feel they still have every chance of winning in 2024.
I'm not even sure they have that many realistic targets. They have perhaps half a dozen really good opportunities and another dozen longer shots.
Remember, the Lib-Dems ALWAYS underperform in general elections - Even their best general election result in 2005 was disappointing compared to what might have been...
BBC talking about how well LDs are doing - but surely key point is they only have 25 to 30 realistic targets at GE.
Con will surely feel they still have every chance of winning in 2024.
I'm not even sure they have that many realistic targets. They have perhaps half a dozen really good opportunities and another dozen longer shots.
Remember, the Lib-Dems ALWAYS underperform in general elections - Even their best general election result in 2005 was disappointing compared to what might have been...
Tories not getting a kicking i think is bad for everybody. Democracy is best when poor governance is held to account and there is a strong opposition who the people have some faith they could govern instead.
Tories not getting a kicking i think is bad for everybody. Democracy is best when poor governance is held to account and there is a strong opposition who the people have some faith they could govern instead.
Tories not getting a kicking i think is bad for everybody. Democracy is best when poor governance is held to account and there is a strong opposition who the people have some faith they could govern instead.
Agree - but don't blame the voters
I haven't. If they don't get a kick up the arse, it is because the public don't believe both parts are true.
Pure speculation, but could the war in Ukraine be hurting Labour, with voters who remember Corbyn? (Opinion on the Ukraine war appears to hardening in the US, with majorities now ready to accept higher gas prices as a consequence of tougher sanctions.)
BBC talking about how well LDs are doing - but surely key point is they only have 25 to 30 realistic targets at GE.
Con will surely feel they still have every chance of winning in 2024.
It's going to be 1992/2005 - a reduced majority and one last hurrah for Con...
If so, will Lab give Starmer a second chance?
It's rare these days to get a second chance, but just maybe they might.
No, Starmer will be done in 2023/2024 I think.
He should still be able to survive this bad night though and lead Labour into the election.
But he has just not won over a single leave voter where he needs them, so next General Election should see a working majority for Boris unless Labour can somehow do something about it.
Another factor is seats like Pitsea NW (Basildon) which in 2014 saw UKIP winning with 45.1% of the vote and Tories third with 16.7%, and then Labour come through the middle with 47.2% in 2018 with the Tories in second with 32.3% and UKIP third with 16.9%, has tonight seen the Tories beat Labour 47.1% to 46.1%.
Labour vote has held up pretty well (previously they had mostly been in the 30-35% range), all that's happened is that there's no UKIP and almost all their vote has gone to the Tories.
Another factor is seats like Pitsea NW (Basildon) which in 2014 saw UKIP winning with 45.1% of the vote and Tories third with 16.7%, and then Labour come through the middle with 47.2% in 2018 with the Tories in second with 32.3% and UKIP third with 16.9%, has tonight seen the Tories beat Labour 47.1% to 46.1%.
Labour vote has held up pretty well (previously they had mostly been in the 30-35% range), all that's happened is that there's no UKIP and almost all their vote has gone to the Tories.
Early days but this looks like a disaster for Labour given the state of the government and the wider political context.
There’s an obsession with the “leave voter” or Corbyn (stull!) but the real reason seems obvious: Starmer is crap. Really, really crap.
And it could be argued he’s just the leader and face of a Parliamentary Labour Party that is really really crap. They certainly seem content with his leadership.
Look forward to how this is spun. A reminder that Labour’s 2018’s results were regarded as disappointing at the time, so it’s not like the comparison is a high watermark either.
Another factor is seats like Pitsea NW (Basildon) which in 2014 saw UKIP winning with 45.1% of the vote and Tories third with 16.7%, and then Labour come through the middle with 47.2% in 2018 with the Tories in second with 32.3% and UKIP third with 16.9%, has tonight seen the Tories beat Labour 47.1% to 46.1%.
Labour vote has held up pretty well (previously they had mostly been in the 30-35% range), all that's happened is that there's no UKIP and almost all their vote has gone to the Tories.
Is it too glib to conclude, not a single leave voter trusts Starmer, Lamy and the Labour front bench, they are sticking with Boris?
Yes.
Basildon voted 69:31 to Leave, so assuming no differential turnout effects then Labour must be getting some Leavers to get to 46.1% today.
But it's rather more complex than that, although Leave/Remain are convenient labels it's more about the factors that led people to vote Leave/Remain, for instance the Rwanda stuff will have gone down very well with some audiences and Labour haven't really offered those audiences anything equally eye-catching (not that "eye-catching" and "effective" are often bedfellows).
Con MPs are surely never going to challenge Boris after this.
tide is looking like it is turning, especially with alot of london vote to come
Tories looking at 300-400 lose i would say, not as bad as it could have been, but not good by any means.
Big thing is that Labour might end up losing seats, which in my opinion would be total disaster.
Labour will gain seats , no chance they end up with a net loss .
How many do you think they will gain?
The rate Labour are losing councillors to libdem and green and Tories, hardly taking a thing off the Tories, it’s a brave call to say labour won’t end up in negative territory. But clarify the bailiwick- just England or include Wales and Scotland. Labour also in negative territory on vote share v 2018.
Another factor is seats like Pitsea NW (Basildon) which in 2014 saw UKIP winning with 45.1% of the vote and Tories third with 16.7%, and then Labour come through the middle with 47.2% in 2018 with the Tories in second with 32.3% and UKIP third with 16.9%, has tonight seen the Tories beat Labour 47.1% to 46.1%.
Labour vote has held up pretty well (previously they had mostly been in the 30-35% range), all that's happened is that there's no UKIP and almost all their vote has gone to the Tories.
Is it too glib to conclude, not a single leave voter trusts Starmer, Lamy and the Labour front bench, they are sticking with Boris?
Yes.
Basildon voted 69:31 to Leave, so assuming no differential turnout effects then Labour must be getting some Leavers to get to 46.1% today.
But it's rather more complex than that, although Leave/Remain are convenient labels it's more about the factors that led people to vote Leave/Remain, for instance the Rwanda stuff will have gone down very well with some audiences and Labour haven't really offered those audiences anything equally eye-catching (not that "eye-catching" and "effective" are often bedfellows).
Yes I can go along with that. If you could meet me part then way and concede yes some leavers switching to Labour, but the interest is more the amount that’s not not amount that are?
Another factor is seats like Pitsea NW (Basildon) which in 2014 saw UKIP winning with 45.1% of the vote and Tories third with 16.7%, and then Labour come through the middle with 47.2% in 2018 with the Tories in second with 32.3% and UKIP third with 16.9%, has tonight seen the Tories beat Labour 47.1% to 46.1%.
Labour vote has held up pretty well (previously they had mostly been in the 30-35% range), all that's happened is that there's no UKIP and almost all their vote has gone to the Tories.
Is it too glib to conclude, not a single leave voter trusts Starmer, Lamy and the Labour front bench, they are sticking with Boris?
Yes.
Basildon voted 69:31 to Leave, so assuming no differential turnout effects then Labour must be getting some Leavers to get to 46.1% today.
But it's rather more complex than that, although Leave/Remain are convenient labels it's more about the factors that led people to vote Leave/Remain, for instance the Rwanda stuff will have gone down very well with some audiences and Labour haven't really offered those audiences anything equally eye-catching (not that "eye-catching" and "effective" are often bedfellows).
Yes I can go along with that. If you could meet me part then way and concede yes some leavers switching to Labour, but the interest is more the amount that’s not not amount that are?
I think both parties are stuck with the legacy of their party leaders in dealing with the parties that were outflanking them circa 2015. Johnson is enabled by Cameron's decisions which (regardless of the effect on the country) eliminated the Tories' competition to their right by out-UKIPing UKIP and now gives them the freedom to become a tax & spend party without worrying too much about losing those who care about fiscal discipline, whereas Labour are stuck with the legacy of Corbyn, who had the opportunity to wipe out their competition but didn't, and so Starmer is now constrained by the fact that if he goes too "Leavey", his gains will be outweighed by his losses to the LDs and Greens.
So he's constrained by that space, all he can really hope to do is just push the case for "change" by looking like a plausible PM and trying to move the conversation away from that kind of Leave vs Remain dichotomy which will always favour the one party on one side rather than the three parties on the other side. But moving the conversation is hard to do as an Opposition leader - although it's striking looking at some of the recent coverage of 25 years since 1997, just how much Blair wanted to do compared to the listlessness of the incumbents.
A few years ago the early results from the north were ok for the tories but the southern results were horrendous. I look forward to reading through the thread to see if theres a pattern this time.
Comments
INCOMING!
Other than that, yes.
Nearly 4000 more seats to go !
Tories looking at 300-400 lose i would say, not as bad as it could have been, but not good by any means.
Big thing is that Labour might end up losing seats, which in my opinion would be total disaster.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61343037
I thought i had a bit more of a pep in my step recently....
But he has just not won over a single leave voter where he needs them, so next General Election should see a working majority for Boris unless Labour can somehow do something about it.
Labour vote has held up pretty well (previously they had mostly been in the 30-35% range), all that's happened is that there's no UKIP and almost all their vote has gone to the Tories.
https://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/ward/3732/
https://www.basildonmeetings.info/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=282&RPID=17293364
NEW THREAD!
There’s an obsession with the “leave voter” or Corbyn (stull!) but the real reason seems obvious: Starmer is crap. Really, really crap.
And it could be argued he’s just the leader and face of a Parliamentary Labour Party that is really really crap. They certainly seem content with his leadership.
Look forward to how this is spun. A reminder that Labour’s 2018’s results were regarded as disappointing at the time, so it’s not like the comparison is a high watermark either.
Basildon voted 69:31 to Leave, so assuming no differential turnout effects then Labour must be getting some Leavers to get to 46.1% today.
But it's rather more complex than that, although Leave/Remain are convenient labels it's more about the factors that led people to vote Leave/Remain, for instance the Rwanda stuff will have gone down very well with some audiences and Labour haven't really offered those audiences anything equally eye-catching (not that "eye-catching" and "effective" are often bedfellows).
But clarify the bailiwick- just England or include Wales and Scotland.
Labour also in negative territory on vote share v 2018.
So he's constrained by that space, all he can really hope to do is just push the case for "change" by looking like a plausible PM and trying to move the conversation away from that kind of Leave vs Remain dichotomy which will always favour the one party on one side rather than the three parties on the other side. But moving the conversation is hard to do as an Opposition leader - although it's striking looking at some of the recent coverage of 25 years since 1997, just how much Blair wanted to do compared to the listlessness of the incumbents.