I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Don't underestimate Jarvis.
I really don't think Dan would a) want it and b) be up to it. He's had too many problems to deal with.
When a Conservative friend gets in touch after the budget to say to me, 'wow Rachel Reeves was very impressive' I sat up and took notice.
She has all the credentials. Standout performer.
Not sure I am the conservative friend you are referring to me but I did say that some time ago !!!!!!!!!!!!
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Yes you do because once people have cast their vote, they think about preferences and leave that "must be" out of preferences if their choice loses - so the "next leader must be a woman" vote is cast in the first round, then people give preferences out.
So some people think eg "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Nandy, but if Nandy loses then I'd rather Starmer than Long Bailey", while others think "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Long Bailey, but Long Bailey loses then I'd rather Starmer than Nandy".
Therefore the "must be a woman" vote is split in the first round, splitting the vote and allowing the only man in the running to get a first round lead by those voting for a man and getting second preferences from those voting for a woman.
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Yes you do because once people have cast their vote, they think about preferences and leave that "must be" out of preferences if their choice loses - so the "next leader must be a woman" vote is cast in the first round, then people give preferences out.
So some people think eg "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Nandy, but if Nandy loses then I'd rather Starmer than Long Bailey", while others think "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Long Bailey, but Long Bailey loses then I'd rather Starmer than Nandy".
Therefore the "must be a woman" vote is split in the first round, splitting the vote and allowing the only man in the running to get a first round lead by those voting for a many and getting second preferences from those voting for a woman.
That rather suggests they don’t really mean it when they say it “must” be a woman.
The Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust has told fans who chanted “sign on” at Anfield that using joblessness and poverty to wind-up opposing supporters is not acceptable.
The chant, sung to the tune of You’ll Never Walk Alone, has been directed at Liverpool and Everton fans since the 1980s, when Merseyside suffered a severe economic recession with Margaret Thatcher as prime minister. It could be heard again during Saturday’s 1-1 draw between Tottenham and Liverpool.
To be honest, I only bother going to Anfield to sing that.
I thought it was What's it like to have no jobs to the tune of Guide me O Thou great redeemer
Lesser used, I suspect - I sang Sign On at Goodison in the mid-90s but don't recall that one.
I mean, honestly - where do you draw the line? Is it OK to sing at Shrewsbury "You're Welsh, and you know you are"? How about "You're Welsh, and the sheep agree"?
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Yes you do because once people have cast their vote, they think about preferences and leave that "must be" out of preferences if their choice loses - so the "next leader must be a woman" vote is cast in the first round, then people give preferences out.
So some people think eg "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Nandy, but if Nandy loses then I'd rather Starmer than Long Bailey", while others think "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Long Bailey, but Long Bailey loses then I'd rather Starmer than Nandy".
Therefore the "must be a woman" vote is split in the first round, splitting the vote and allowing the only man in the running to get a first round lead by those voting for a many and getting second preferences from those voting for a woman.
That rather suggests they don’t really mean it when they say it “must” be a woman.
Get on the next PM market from the Labour pool, NOT the Conservative one. Boris will not feel any obligation to follow SKS on this if the latter resigns.
There's exceptional value to be had.
Just DON'T bet on Andy Burnham. He was useless last time, he doesn't gel with blue wall, he isn't even an MP, and he's a man. Labour will go female next time around.
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
The Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust has told fans who chanted “sign on” at Anfield that using joblessness and poverty to wind-up opposing supporters is not acceptable.
The chant, sung to the tune of You’ll Never Walk Alone, has been directed at Liverpool and Everton fans since the 1980s, when Merseyside suffered a severe economic recession with Margaret Thatcher as prime minister. It could be heard again during Saturday’s 1-1 draw between Tottenham and Liverpool.
To be honest, I only bother going to Anfield to sing that.
I thought it was What's it like to have no jobs to the tune of Guide me O Thou great redeemer
Lesser used, I suspect - I sang Sign On at Goodison in the mid-90s but don't recall that one.
I mean, honestly - where do you draw the line? Is it OK to sing at Shrewsbury "You're Welsh, and you know you are"? How about "You're Welsh, and the sheep agree"?
I’ve heard “you’re French and you know you are” sung at an international to a French team…
Keir seems like the kind of guy that reminds the teacher to give homework out
Indeed, and no one liked that kid.
Johnson being the supply teacher who rocks up 5 minutes late and puts a video on.
It's actually very easy to imagine most frontline politicians as secondary school teachers, particularly Labour ones. I had teaches just like Corbyn (geography), Cooper (headteacher), Ed Balls (English & games), Nandy (French and Spanish), Burgon (PE), Gove (chemistry), Jess Phillips (Drama), Tugendhat (games and CCF), Rees-Mogg (RE).
To be fair Private Eye got there years ago, but it works.
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Stv I think
There's only one leader so the two are indistinguishable...
In theory, you don't split the vote. But that does rely on voters using their preferences.
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Yes you do because once people have cast their vote, they think about preferences and leave that "must be" out of preferences if their choice loses - so the "next leader must be a woman" vote is cast in the first round, then people give preferences out.
So some people think eg "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Nandy, but if Nandy loses then I'd rather Starmer than Long Bailey", while others think "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Long Bailey, but Long Bailey loses then I'd rather Starmer than Nandy".
Therefore the "must be a woman" vote is split in the first round, splitting the vote and allowing the only man in the running to get a first round lead by those voting for a man and getting second preferences from those voting for a woman.
Anyone thinking "must be a woman" would automatically give the man their last preference.
I think last time there was more of a "RLB - no thankyou!" vibe among the Nandyites.
@Roger raised an interesting point downthread. Suppose the police find Starmer has no case to answer, but AFTER Starmer has indicated he would go if "convicted".
Can you imagine the moral authority that would give Starmer to hammer Boris with?
Mmm ... Surely, this can be portrayed as putting undue pressure on Durham Constabulary to clear him.
His best course of action at the moment is to wait till Durham Plod have reported.
He obviously should figure out what he is going to do if he gets a FPN, but he doesn't have to tell the press now.
I don't agree it does influence the police. Starmer must say if he is found guilty he will resign- personally I believe he should have gone on the news of the investigation, as he demanded of Johnson.
Johnson is under no obligation to do the same.
Starmer resigning - which I don't expect even if he gets a fine which in any case he probably won't - would not imo cause Johnson to resign. The Tories couldn't call for him to go (obvs) and if he did go their line would be Starmer clearly couldn't live with having his hypocrisy exposed and that was a matter for him.
What hypocrisy? Breaking a law he voted for? No, Johnson did that and said it was ok to just apologize and crack on with the job. So not that. That's no resigning matter in their eyes. What then? Well he called for Johnson to resign when he was fined, didn't he? That's the resigning issue.
I’m sorry Kin, but I don’t understand your reasoning. Surely Starmer and then Boris don’t have a choice the way this scenario has got on a roll now. Are you working on the idea, it’s not up to them, they don’t have a choice?
if Starmer doesn’t resign his own and labour ratings go through the floor along with their chances of improving much on the 200 seats they currently hold. Not least because the left will go on and on about it, not only hollowing Starmer out but making the party look split hence another reason they will decline in the polls, probably at green and Libdem gain. An unpopular Labour leader and unpopular Labour Party can forget about much assistance from tactical votes too.
If Starmer went immediately it would look at least a bit principled. And it is that really what does for Boris.
Without Starmer under investigation for an FPN, Boris only danger this summer would be how to ride out getting more himself. But the voters will react alarmingly towards Boris and the Tory’s if Starmer resigns but Boris toughs it out. If Boris doesn’t follow suit in resigning, the ratings of his party (seen to be rallying around the indefensible) will go horribly through the floor forces it out of him, or forces hand of his party. So Boris is plunged into jeopardy for an inglorious end this week, thanks to the Mail’s campaign.
That is how it likely to play out next month isn’t it? Two new Party leaders in September.
Get on the next PM market from the Labour pool, NOT the Conservative one. Boris will not feel any obligation to follow SKS on this if the latter resigns.
There's exceptional value to be had.
Just DON'T bet on Andy Burnham. He was useless last time, he doesn't gel with blue wall, he isn't even an MP, and he's a man. Labour will go female next time around.
Reeves and Nandy are the shortest Lab women to be Next PM. Both 100/1.
To put that into perspective, dead-man-walking Douglas Ross is 50/1.
It’s not happening.
Douglas wont have a seat if the boundary changes go through
Moray is indeed being split up between three new seats. The biggest chunk is going into the new Highland East and Elgin seat. Baxter rates this as:
66% SNP win 34% Con win
But that is largely based on polling before the SCons dropped into the teens.
Yeah. Although Moray was the only area their vote share increased from 2017 (albeit fractionally) aside from Dumfries and Galloway. They also held up ok in Highland. So it's not where the votes are leaking at the moment (Edinburgh, the central belt especially)
Yes, both Edinburgh and Glasgow were absolute horror shows for the local Conservatives. Brexit really undermined them, but the self-inflicted blows from their supposed colleagues in London just never stop. They really ought to resurrect the old “Progressives” brand.
The problem for Highland and Moray Tories is that nobody else wants to work with them.
Yeah, they've got to make some choices. I think they'd be better off with Murdo in charge and becoming the party of the coasts and borders (and perthshire). They ought to remain competitive in Aberdeenshire and Ayrshire and Argyll will become interesting if labour recover at the SNPs expense rather than trading votes with the Tories. D and G I fancy being their impregnable last stand bastion
Murdo just lacks everything you expect to find in a senior politician. I think it comes from low self-esteem. He behaves like a classic back-bencher, doomed to never control any actual levers of power. He’s almost like a George Galloway character, before he quit Labour: a figure of scorn and derision even among party colleagues.
And as for coasts, borders and Perthshire, that would require the Tories to become pro-farming, pro-fisheries and pro-business. All recent traffic has been entirely in the opposite direction.
Nope, the Scottish centre-right will recover post-independence, not pre-.
Looking at the figures for the recent local elections the Lib Dems claim the following Conservative MPs would lose their seats ( assuming the same percentage results); Mary Robinson (Cheadle), William Wragg (Hazel Grove), Dominic Raab (Esher and Walton), Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon), John Redwood (Wokingham), Alex Chalk (Cheltenham), Steve Brine (Winchester), Elliott Colburn ( Carshalton and Wallingham), Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough), and Bim Afolami (Hitchen and Harpended).
The Tottenham Hotspur Supporters’ Trust has told fans who chanted “sign on” at Anfield that using joblessness and poverty to wind-up opposing supporters is not acceptable.
The chant, sung to the tune of You’ll Never Walk Alone, has been directed at Liverpool and Everton fans since the 1980s, when Merseyside suffered a severe economic recession with Margaret Thatcher as prime minister. It could be heard again during Saturday’s 1-1 draw between Tottenham and Liverpool.
To be honest, I only bother going to Anfield to sing that.
I thought it was What's it like to have no jobs to the tune of Guide me O Thou great redeemer
Lesser used, I suspect - I sang Sign On at Goodison in the mid-90s but don't recall that one.
I mean, honestly - where do you draw the line? Is it OK to sing at Shrewsbury "You're Welsh, and you know you are"? How about "You're Welsh, and the sheep agree"?
I’ve heard “you’re French and you know you are” sung at an international to a French team…
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Yes you do because once people have cast their vote, they think about preferences and leave that "must be" out of preferences if their choice loses - so the "next leader must be a woman" vote is cast in the first round, then people give preferences out.
So some people think eg "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Nandy, but if Nandy loses then I'd rather Starmer than Long Bailey", while others think "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Long Bailey, but Long Bailey loses then I'd rather Starmer than Nandy".
Therefore the "must be a woman" vote is split in the first round, splitting the vote and allowing the only man in the running to get a first round lead by those voting for a man and getting second preferences from those voting for a woman.
Anyone thinking "must be a woman" would automatically give the man their last preference.
I think last time there was more of a "RLB - no thankyou!" vibe among the Nandyites.
No Labour politician is going to say "it must be a woman" in public this time. Because if they do, you just know what the journalists will ask them next.
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Stv I think
AV. We are only electing one person.
Yes sorry.
Of course, some may say that AV is a sub-set of STV where there is only one seat to fill. Like in Scottish council by-elections.
The danger will be to Johnson when/If Beergate is found not to have broken the rules*.
At that point expect to see Starmer's inner George Carmen come out with a vengiance.
(Raab came very close to saying Starmer should resign before getting his brain into gear!).
*At the time of Beergate the rules were stage 2 which was more lax than stage 1which covered Partygate
Any speech that promises to resign if found to break the rules also needs to take on the fact pattern aggressively - he needs to start by laying out all the differences (the real legal ones, but also the optics) between the curry on the campaign trail and the multiple actual parties complete with DJs, karaoke and suitcases at Downing Street. He needs to lay this on thick so that the narrative sticks.
Then, after a pause, he can announce "however, I recognise that in questions like this, notwithstanding the huge difference in the events in question, it would simply not be acceptable for a senior politician to stay in place if they are found to have broken rules by the police. Therefore etc etc"
I disagree. There’s nothing to be gained from arguing about the equivalency or not between No 10 and the Durham Event. It looks mealy mouthed. Labour have been trying this line for the past day or so and I’m afraid it sounds rather panicked and defensive. IMHO just keep it to co-operating, the resignation pledge (if they go for that) and saying you don’t believe you did anything wrong. Then wait to see what comes out in the wash.
That's just yielding the floor to the Tories. Something Labour do too often. Look how the Tories jumped straight to the "hijacked by a cake" narrative. Yes it annoyed lots of people, yes it looked tone deaf, but it stuck. Just like much of the other spin they come out with. Because journalists run on narrative and nature abhors a vacuum. Stay quiet and the government media will fill the silence with a narrative that says beergate was as bad as the Downing St parties. In fact "worse, because it's hypocritical".
And if a FPN (theoretically) is received, what then?
Does it become an argument of “your FPN was worse than mine”?
In the public’s view a penalty will be a penalty.
If a FPN is not received then the dividing line has already been drawn - one was worse than the other. If Labour spend the next few weeks trying to split hairs on beers vs parties vs campaign stops vs cake vs curry it will only serve to drag themselves down into the “they’re all as bad as each other” narrative.
Keir seems like the kind of guy that reminds the teacher to give homework out
Indeed, and no one liked that kid.
Johnson being the supply teacher who rocks up 5 minutes late and puts a video on.
It's actually very easy to imagine most frontline politicians as secondary school teachers, particularly Labour ones. I had teaches just like Corbyn (geography), Cooper (headteacher), Ed Balls (English & games), Nandy (French and Spanish), Burgon (PE), Gove (chemistry), Jess Phillips (Drama), Tugendhat (games and CCF), Rees-Mogg (RE).
To be fair Private Eye got there years ago, but it works.
Terrible insult to Geography teachers. They are not universally as stupid as Corbyn
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Yes you do because once people have cast their vote, they think about preferences and leave that "must be" out of preferences if their choice loses - so the "next leader must be a woman" vote is cast in the first round, then people give preferences out.
So some people think eg "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Nandy, but if Nandy loses then I'd rather Starmer than Long Bailey", while others think "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Long Bailey, but Long Bailey loses then I'd rather Starmer than Nandy".
Therefore the "must be a woman" vote is split in the first round, splitting the vote and allowing the only man in the running to get a first round lead by those voting for a man and getting second preferences from those voting for a woman.
Anyone thinking "must be a woman" would automatically give the man their last preference.
I think last time there was more of a "RLB - no thankyou!" vibe among the Nandyites.
No Labour politician is going to say "it must be a woman" in public this time. Because if they do, you just know what the journalists will ask them next.
Looking at the figures for the recent local elections the Lib Dems claim the following Conservative MPs would lose their seats ( assuming the same percentage results); Mary Robinson (Cheadle), William Wragg (Hazel Grove), Dominic Raab (Esher and Walton), Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon), John Redwood (Wokingham), Alex Chalk (Cheltenham), Steve Brine (Winchester), Elliott Colburn ( Carshalton and Wallingham), Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough), and Bim Afolami (Hitchen and Harpended).
It's basically a list of the "spotlight on" series in Evening Standard's Thursday property supplement.
The danger will be to Johnson when/If Beergate is found not to have broken the rules*.
At that point expect to see Starmer's inner George Carmen come out with a vengiance.
(Raab came very close to saying Starmer should resign before getting his brain into gear!).
*At the time of Beergate the rules were stage 2 which was more lax than stage 1which covered Partygate
Any speech that promises to resign if found to break the rules also needs to take on the fact pattern aggressively - he needs to start by laying out all the differences (the real legal ones, but also the optics) between the curry on the campaign trail and the multiple actual parties complete with DJs, karaoke and suitcases at Downing Street. He needs to lay this on thick so that the narrative sticks.
Then, after a pause, he can announce "however, I recognise that in questions like this, notwithstanding the huge difference in the events in question, it would simply not be acceptable for a senior politician to stay in place if they are found to have broken rules by the police. Therefore etc etc"
Not sure that is a good idea as it could be seen as attempting to influence the decision
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Yes you do because once people have cast their vote, they think about preferences and leave that "must be" out of preferences if their choice loses - so the "next leader must be a woman" vote is cast in the first round, then people give preferences out.
So some people think eg "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Nandy, but if Nandy loses then I'd rather Starmer than Long Bailey", while others think "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Long Bailey, but Long Bailey loses then I'd rather Starmer than Nandy".
Therefore the "must be a woman" vote is split in the first round, splitting the vote and allowing the only man in the running to get a first round lead by those voting for a man and getting second preferences from those voting for a woman.
Anyone thinking "must be a woman" would automatically give the man their last preference.
I think last time there was more of a "RLB - no thankyou!" vibe among the Nandyites.
Nah because people think it "must be a woman" but only with a first preference and then they move onto other things.
Jess Phillips was saying it would be "embarrassing" for Labour's next leader after Corbyn not to be a woman, but when she pulled out of the race she pointedly didn't I believe back Nandy and it was said that a lot of her support went to Starmer over either of Nandy or Long Bailey.
I could understand her saying "RLB - no thank you!" but if she'd genuinely thought it must be a woman she should have backed Nandy and so should her supporters, but it seems she/they didn't.
Keir seems like the kind of guy that reminds the teacher to give homework out
Indeed, and no one liked that kid.
Johnson being the supply teacher who rocks up 5 minutes late and puts a video on.
It's actually very easy to imagine most frontline politicians as secondary school teachers, particularly Labour ones. I had teaches just like Corbyn (geography), Cooper (headteacher), Ed Balls (English & games), Nandy (French and Spanish), Burgon (PE), Gove (chemistry), Jess Phillips (Drama), Tugendhat (games and CCF), Rees-Mogg (RE).
To be fair Private Eye got there years ago, but it works.
Terrible insult to Geography teachers. They are not universally as stupid as Corbyn
Well my mother for starters. She doesn't look like him either. But such geography teachers undoubtedly exist.
All the public can see is a man who called for stricter harder lockdowns then at the same time thought it was fine to have a pre-arranged curry night with plenty of beer and 30 workmates
And then lied about it, multiple times
Even if Starmer escapes a FPN people will just think “so he got lucky”
He’s either badly damaged or he’s a goner
If he does go I agree that there will then be intense pressure on Boris. Hence the Tories suddenly being all kind and understanding today
Judging by friends and family (many of whom have been seriously harsh about Boris) Starmer is now badly damaged, whatever
“They’re all the same”
“Bunch of wankers”
“Fuck them all”
Etc etc.
Starmer has lost his “honest but boring” USP. Which is pretty much all he had
Yea, right, you are just trotting out what all Johnson Apologists want people to believe; that all politicians are dishonest, so that the Fat Clown doesn't look so bad. Not all people are as gullible as people that still believe in Brexit.
@Roger raised an interesting point downthread. Suppose the police find Starmer has no case to answer, but AFTER Starmer has indicated he would go if "convicted".
Can you imagine the moral authority that would give Starmer to hammer Boris with?
Get on the next PM market from the Labour pool, NOT the Conservative one. Boris will not feel any obligation to follow SKS on this if the latter resigns.
There's exceptional value to be had.
Just DON'T bet on Andy Burnham. He was useless last time, he doesn't gel with blue wall, he isn't even an MP, and he's a man. Labour will go female next time around.
Reeves and Nandy are the shortest Lab women to be Next PM. Both 100/1.
To put that into perspective, dead-man-walking Douglas Ross is 50/1.
It’s not happening.
Douglas wont have a seat if the boundary changes go through
Moray is indeed being split up between three new seats. The biggest chunk is going into the new Highland East and Elgin seat. Baxter rates this as:
66% SNP win 34% Con win
But that is largely based on polling before the SCons dropped into the teens.
Yeah. Although Moray was the only area their vote share increased from 2017 (albeit fractionally) aside from Dumfries and Galloway. They also held up ok in Highland. So it's not where the votes are leaking at the moment (Edinburgh, the central belt especially)
Yes, both Edinburgh and Glasgow were absolute horror shows for the local Conservatives. Brexit really undermined them, but the self-inflicted blows from their supposed colleagues in London just never stop. They really ought to resurrect the old “Progressives” brand.
The problem for Highland and Moray Tories is that nobody else wants to work with them.
Yeah, they've got to make some choices. I think they'd be better off with Murdo in charge and becoming the party of the coasts and borders (and perthshire). They ought to remain competitive in Aberdeenshire and Ayrshire and Argyll will become interesting if labour recover at the SNPs expense rather than trading votes with the Tories. D and G I fancy being their impregnable last stand bastion
Murdo just lacks everything you expect to find in a senior politician. I think it comes from low self-esteem. He behaves like a classic back-bencher, doomed to never control any actual levers of power. He’s almost like a George Galloway character, before he quit Labour: a figure of scorn and derision even among party colleagues.
And as for coasts, borders and Perthshire, that would require the Tories to become pro-farming, pro-fisheries and pro-business. All recent traffic has been entirely in the opposite direction.
Nope, the Scottish centre-right will recover post-independence, not pre-.
Remember the Queens XI tweet. Not a sign of a canny politician - instantly pisses off a fair chunk of the electorate in a stupid way. I can't imagine Mr Ross coming out with it (and not just cos he is the ref).
Judging by friends and family (many of whom have been seriously harsh about Boris) Starmer is now badly damaged, whatever
“They’re all the same”
“Bunch of wankers”
“Fuck them all”
Etc etc.
Starmer has lost his “honest but boring” USP. Which is pretty much all he had
Yea, right, you are just trotting out what all Johnson Apologists want people to believe; that all politicians are dishonest, so that the Fat Clown doesn't look so bad. Not all people are as gullible as people that still believe in Brexit.
They ARE all dishonest. You can’t be a successful politician without lying all the time. It is an intrinsic flaw of the process
Keir seems like the kind of guy that reminds the teacher to give homework out
Indeed, and no one liked that kid.
Johnson being the supply teacher who rocks up 5 minutes late and puts a video on.
It's actually very easy to imagine most frontline politicians as secondary school teachers, particularly Labour ones. I had teaches just like Corbyn (geography), Cooper (headteacher), Ed Balls (English & games), Nandy (French and Spanish), Burgon (PE), Gove (chemistry), Jess Phillips (Drama), Tugendhat (games and CCF), Rees-Mogg (RE).
To be fair Private Eye got there years ago, but it works.
Terrible insult to Geography teachers. They are not universally as stupid as Corbyn
Well my mother for starters. She doesn't look like him either. But such geography teachers undoubtedly exist.
The danger will be to Johnson when/If Beergate is found not to have broken the rules*.
At that point expect to see Starmer's inner George Carmen come out with a vengiance.
(Raab came very close to saying Starmer should resign before getting his brain into gear!).
*At the time of Beergate the rules were stage 2 which was more lax than stage 1which covered Partygate
Any speech that promises to resign if found to break the rules also needs to take on the fact pattern aggressively - he needs to start by laying out all the differences (the real legal ones, but also the optics) between the curry on the campaign trail and the multiple actual parties complete with DJs, karaoke and suitcases at Downing Street. He needs to lay this on thick so that the narrative sticks.
Then, after a pause, he can announce "however, I recognise that in questions like this, notwithstanding the huge difference in the events in question, it would simply not be acceptable for a senior politician to stay in place if they are found to have broken rules by the police. Therefore etc etc"
Not sure that is a good idea as it could be seen as attempting to influence the decision
But could it influence the decision. The police already know the stakes in giving them to Boris and Sunak. Surely Theres a job to do and they do their duty, which is fairness as far as possible. If the police have enough evidence, it’s the easiest thing in world for police to say, judge this evidence for yourself, it’s the right decision.
The bigger problem for the police to wrestle is their sensible policy of no retrospective fines is now getting shredded - where will it end? Where will it end up eating up resources chasing up all these retrospective fines?
Judging by friends and family (many of whom have been seriously harsh about Boris) Starmer is now badly damaged, whatever
“They’re all the same”
“Bunch of wankers”
“Fuck them all”
Etc etc.
Starmer has lost his “honest but boring” USP. Which is pretty much all he had
Yea, right, you are just trotting out what all Johnson Apologists want people to believe; that all politicians are dishonest, so that the Fat Clown doesn't look so bad. Not all people are as gullible as people that still believe in Brexit.
They ARE all dishonest. You can’t be a successful politician without lying all the time. It is an intrinsic flaw of the process
I have known quite a few, and that is simply not the case. I doubt that such a sweeping generalisation even applies to journalists or low brow novelists.
Looking at the figures for the recent local elections the Lib Dems claim the following Conservative MPs would lose their seats ( assuming the same percentage results); Mary Robinson (Cheadle), William Wragg (Hazel Grove), Dominic Raab (Esher and Walton), Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon), John Redwood (Wokingham), Alex Chalk (Cheltenham), Steve Brine (Winchester), Elliott Colburn ( Carshalton and Wallingham), Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough), and Bim Afolami (Hitchen and Harpended).
It's basically a list of the "spotlight on" series in Evening Standard's Thursday property supplement.
Maybe they should just unashamedly say it.
We are the party of the haves, the successful, the top 10%, the NIMBYs with nice houses, those who want to pull up the ladder behind them…
If Starmer does go he would be the shortest serving party leader since IDS or Howard. Though I doubt he will be fined and he knows that too hence his statement.
I also doubt it affects Boris too much given Tory voters think both Boris and Starmer should stay party leaders even if both are fined
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Stv I think
AV. We are only electing one person.
Yes sorry.
Of course, some may say that AV is a sub-set of STV where there is only one seat to fill. Like in Scottish council by-elections.
But without the "surplus votes" malarkey.
Scotland got the results out OK, but NI looked to me to be a case for using scanning / counting technology on the paper ballots.
Run them all through 1, 2, 3 recognition (like the cheque pay in machine at the bank), refer dubious ones for a human steer on screen, ka-chuk, ka-chuk, quick provisional results, then hand count, real results. Only if the machine gives issues, go straight to the hand count.
I also don't know why they didn't eliminate multiple candidates at once on occasion - e.g. where the penultimate candidate obviously couldn't get votes to progress and no one could reach threshold with the transfers. Perhaps this no faster than doing one at a time.
Starmer to speak at 4PM and will confirm that he will resign if issued with a fine.
First question will surely be: You thought Boris ought to resign as soon as he was under investigation. Why have you not already resigned and why did you change your mind?
To be fair, I think he had no option but to do this. The least worst option. If he gets a FPN then he is gone but maybe Labour will be in a better position. If he doesn't then he can say he would've gone if he had. Although the question I just suggested will still be asked.
Meanwhile, the DUP demonstrate that maybe they need extra homework to see if they have been paying attention in class. They must think that Boris actually cares...
If Starmer says he will resign if issued with a FPN then he is making it certain Rayner will have to concur and resign as well
Has it been made explicit that she being investigated by the police or is it just Starmer?
Questionnaires are being sent by Durham Police detectives to all attendees so yes, if it breached covid regulations, they will all receive FPN's and including Mary Foy, the local mop
All the public can see is a man who called for stricter harder lockdowns then at the same time thought it was fine to have a pre-arranged curry night with plenty of beer and 30 workmates
And then lied about it, multiple times
Even if Starmer escapes a FPN people will just think “so he got lucky”
He’s either badly damaged or he’s a goner
If he does go I agree that there will then be intense pressure on Boris. Hence the Tories suddenly being all kind and understanding today
I find the party loyalists approach on Twitter illuminating from both sides. To suggest a lot of Keir Beer backers were genuine about their breathless condemnation of party prick in number 10 would be stretching credulity. And vice versa.
If Starmer says he will resign if issued with a FPN then he is making it certain Rayner will have to concur and resign as well
Has it been made explicit that she being investigated by the police or is it just Starmer?
Questionnaires are being sent by Durham Police detectives to all attendees so yes, if it breached covid regulations, they will all receive FPN's and including Mary Foy, the local mop
That's a wonderful typo. They must be going to wipe the floor with her.
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Just went to double check, this. Christ, Labour do have a problem. The first female candidate, ever, was 2010 (Diane Abbott) (though a long period between elections since 1994)
Looking at the figures for the recent local elections the Lib Dems claim the following Conservative MPs would lose their seats ( assuming the same percentage results); Mary Robinson (Cheadle), William Wragg (Hazel Grove), Dominic Raab (Esher and Walton), Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon), John Redwood (Wokingham), Alex Chalk (Cheltenham), Steve Brine (Winchester), Elliott Colburn ( Carshalton and Wallingham), Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough), and Bim Afolami (Hitchen and Harpended).
It's interesting that CCHQ has put out a message explicitly reminding Tories not to call on Starmer to resign.
Not repeating Starmer's mistakes.
Boris was being crucified in the media without Starmer leading the attack, but he chose to go in full attack mode anyway. Now its turned around, the Tories are right not to want the spotlight back on them.
If Starmer says he will resign if issued with a FPN then he is making it certain Rayner will have to concur and resign as well
Has it been made explicit that she being investigated by the police or is it just Starmer?
Questionnaires are being sent by Durham Police detectives to all attendees so yes, if it breached covid regulations, they will all receive FPN's and including Mary Foy, the local mop
That's a wonderful typo. They must be going to wipe the floor with her.
Judging by friends and family (many of whom have been seriously harsh about Boris) Starmer is now badly damaged, whatever
“They’re all the same”
“Bunch of wankers”
“Fuck them all”
Etc etc.
Starmer has lost his “honest but boring” USP. Which is pretty much all he had
Yea, right, you are just trotting out what all Johnson Apologists want people to believe; that all politicians are dishonest, so that the Fat Clown doesn't look so bad. Not all people are as gullible as people that still believe in Brexit.
They ARE all dishonest. You can’t be a successful politician without lying all the time. It is an intrinsic flaw of the process
I would class lying and dishonesty as somewhat different things in this context. There are lies that politicians have to tell all the time that are a normal part of the political game. Like pretending you agree with every one of your party's policies or that you think all of your colleagues are brilliant. People understand that politicians have to tell these kind of lies and they don't really mind because most people have to do similar things in their own lives. Then there is being totally dishonest about substantive issues. Or lying in parliament. Or repeatedly saying things that you have been told are untrue. In other words, total disregard for the truth. That is actually quite rare in politics, in my opinion.
If Starmer does go he would be the shortest serving party leader since IDS or Howard. Though I doubt he will be fined and he knows that too hence his statement.
I also doubt it affects Boris too much given Tory voters think both Boris and Starmer should stay party leaders even if both are fined
I agree - I doubt he'll be fined and I'm topping up on him for next PM at 7.4.
Looking at the figures for the recent local elections the Lib Dems claim the following Conservative MPs would lose their seats ( assuming the same percentage results); Mary Robinson (Cheadle), William Wragg (Hazel Grove), Dominic Raab (Esher and Walton), Stephen Hammond (Wimbledon), John Redwood (Wokingham), Alex Chalk (Cheltenham), Steve Brine (Winchester), Elliott Colburn ( Carshalton and Wallingham), Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough), and Bim Afolami (Hitchen and Harpended).
It's interesting that CCHQ has put out a message explicitly reminding Tories not to call on Starmer to resign.
Not repeating Starmer's mistakes.
Boris was being crucified in the media without Starmer leading the attack, but he chose to go in full attack mode anyway. Now its turned around, the Tories are right not to want the spotlight back on them.
Probably because even a complete idiot would realise that their record when held up to scrutiny and comparison is a lot worse. If they can persuade the gullible that there is equivalence they will be once again laughing behind their hands at the very stupid electorate.
The danger will be to Johnson when/If Beergate is found not to have broken the rules*.
At that point expect to see Starmer's inner George Carmen come out with a vengiance.
(Raab came very close to saying Starmer should resign before getting his brain into gear!).
*At the time of Beergate the rules were stage 2 which was more lax than stage 1which covered Partygate
Any speech that promises to resign if found to break the rules also needs to take on the fact pattern aggressively - he needs to start by laying out all the differences (the real legal ones, but also the optics) between the curry on the campaign trail and the multiple actual parties complete with DJs, karaoke and suitcases at Downing Street. He needs to lay this on thick so that the narrative sticks.
Then, after a pause, he can announce "however, I recognise that in questions like this, notwithstanding the huge difference in the events in question, it would simply not be acceptable for a senior politician to stay in place if they are found to have broken rules by the police. Therefore etc etc"
Not sure that is a good idea as it could be seen as attempting to influence the decision
But could it influence the decision. The police already know the stakes in giving them to Boris and Sunak. Surely Theres a job to do and they do their duty, which is fairness as far as possible. If the police have enough evidence, it’s the easiest thing in world for police to say, judge this evidence for yourself, it’s the right decision.
The bigger problem for the police to wrestle is their sensible policy of no retrospective fines is now getting shredded - where will it end? Where will it end up eating up resources chasing up all these retrospective fines?
Your last paragraph demonstrates just how absurd these rules were and I have no idea why the MET reversed their non retrospective interventions other than because of political pressure
As has been commented on, we are now in a situation that investigative journalists will be trawling numerous events across the political spectrum for more sensational stories and undermining more politicians
It is just crazy, especially as this is no more than a parking fine
Starmer to speak at 4PM and will confirm that he will resign if issued with a fine.
First question will surely be: You thought Boris ought to resign as soon as he was under investigation. Why have you not already resigned and why did you change your mind?
To be fair, I think he had no option but to do this. The least worst option. If he gets a FPN then he is gone but maybe Labour will be in a better position. If he doesn't then he can say he would've gone if he had. Although the question I just suggested will still be asked.
The contrast would be what was already public domain, the sum total of statements to the house, the redacted Gray report at the point of charge. Labour held off calling on Boris to go for a good while after the SNP.
If Starmer says he will resign if issued with a FPN then he is making it certain Rayner will have to concur and resign as well
Has it been made explicit that she being investigated by the police or is it just Starmer?
Questionnaires are being sent by Durham Police detectives to all attendees so yes, if it breached covid regulations, they will all receive FPN's and including Mary Foy, the local mop
That's a wonderful typo. They must be going to wipe the floor with her.
If Starmer says he will resign if issued with a FPN then he is making it certain Rayner will have to concur and resign as well
Has it been made explicit that she being investigated by the police or is it just Starmer?
Questionnaires are being sent by Durham Police detectives to all attendees so yes, if it breached covid regulations, they will all receive FPN's and including Mary Foy, the local mop
That's a wonderful typo. They must be going to wipe the floor with her.
I just want to reiterate that Labour were under immense pressure last time to answer the unanswerable charge of never having a female leader. They are EXTREMELY vulnerable on this. SKS was chosen because he had the credentials to boot out the Corbynistas and anti-Semitism. Now that the reset has, mostly, occurred, Labour have a new pool from which to choose.
If he resigns I fully expect SKS to say the same thing: that they need to choose a female leader.
I'm on Rachel Reeves, Lisa Nandy and Yvette Cooper at huge odds: 100/1 +. I think that covers me although you never know. Angela Rayner is part of Beergate. Jess Phillips is just not up to it, nice though she seems.
Rachel Reeves in my opinion is the standout. I got 100/1 on her yesterday.
Labour don't have a great record on electing female leaders, unfortunately.
It's worse than never having elected a female leader - no woman has ever beaten any man in any Labour leadership election.
Which makes me suspect that they'll only get a female leader if they cook up an all-female shortlist. Will Streeting accept that?
Starmer didn't, meaning he ran effectively alone against multiple women who split the "next leader must be a woman" vote.
Ironically that pressure might make a lone man running against multiple women the favourite again next time, as happened with Starmer.
It's AV. You don't split the opposition vote.
Stv I think
AV. We are only electing one person.
Yes, AV is a special case of STV when there is only one vacancy.
Another thought occurs to me over the ridiculous 'the curry was late' nonsense. We know it was a pre arranged dinner 'YS to order'. Are we really to believe YS didn't contact the Indian In advance and say 'here's some great publicity for you. Takeaway for a party of 30 for the leader of the opposition required for 8.30 pm' and that the Indian takeaway wouldn't have absolutely ensured dinner for LOTO was hot, tasty and on schedule?? Is the position that YS got to 7 and said 'oh shit, i haven't ordered Keirs dinner!'
I said this on Saturday when the story broke. If he’s fined, he’ll have to resign, so there’s no downside to saying he will. Obviously, it won’t lead to Johnson resigning, but the contrast will be there. And, if Starmer does end up having to step down, Labour gets a more politically savvy leader after Starmer has done most of the internal cleaning up. It’s a no lose for Labour.
Another thought occurs to me over the ridiculous 'the curry was late' nonsense. We know it was a pre arranged dinner 'YS to order'. Are we really to believe YS didn't contact the Indian In advance and say 'here's some great publicity for you. Takeaway for a party of 30 for the leader of the opposition required for 8.30 pm' and that the Indian takeaway wouldn't have absolutely ensured dinner for LOTO was hot, tasty and on schedule?? Is the position that YS got to 7 and said 'oh shit, i haven't ordered Keirs dinner!'
Not sure CCHQ will pay you for that one. Keep trying.
I said this on Saturday when the story broke. If he’s fined, he’ll have to resign, so there’s no downside to saying he will. Obviously, it won’t lead to Johnson resigning, but the contrast will be there. And, if Starmer does end up having to step down, Labour gets a more politically savvy leader after Starmer has done most of the internal cleaning up. It’s a no lose for Labour.
Who is this much more politically savvy leader just sitting waiting around doing nothing for Labour? Starmer was the best of the bad bunch.
I said this on Saturday when the story broke. If he’s fined, he’ll have to resign, so there’s no downside to saying he will. Obviously, it won’t lead to Johnson resigning, but the contrast will be there. And, if Starmer does end up having to step down, Labour gets a more politically savvy leader after Starmer has done most of the internal cleaning up. It’s a no lose for Labour.
Another thought occurs to me over the ridiculous 'the curry was late' nonsense. We know it was a pre arranged dinner 'YS to order'. Are we really to believe YS didn't contact the Indian In advance and say 'here's some great publicity for you. Takeaway for a party of 30 for the leader of the opposition required for 8.30 pm' and that the Indian takeaway wouldn't have absolutely ensured dinner for LOTO was hot, tasty and on schedule?? Is the position that YS got to 7 and said 'oh shit, i haven't ordered Keirs dinner!'
There's a rather obvious problem with that. PLumping publicly for one side in politics is often dangerous for a business. Especially a local one.
-Johnson only has himself for blame for 'Partgate': the government he leads didn't have to set the rules as they did, and otherwise they should have made sure they always followed them. -Starmer only has himself to blame for 'Beergate': he did not have to be quite so unbearably sactimonious when 'partgate' broke.
Given these rules were seemingly so easy to break for the nature of work that politicians do, a better long-term strategy for Starmer might have been to say something like: 'The Prime Minister has made a foolish error and very possibly a foolish law, if the line between acceptable and unnacceptable gatherings is so arbitrary and ambiguous that he can use a loophole to escape the penalty. This emphasises the urgent need for a public enquiry on the United Kingdom's response to the pandemic, and places the government's decisions squarely in the dock.'
As it is, he made his criticism as intensely personal, and moralising, as possible: 'Just as he has done throughout his life, he has damaged everyone and everything around him along the way.' It's very difficult to row back from this with any dignity.
P.S. If both Starmer *and* Cummings end up being fined I don't suppose Johnson would much mind. If Starmer resigns of course the pressure would be on Johnson to do the same.
Judging by friends and family (many of whom have been seriously harsh about Boris) Starmer is now badly damaged, whatever
“They’re all the same”
“Bunch of wankers”
“Fuck them all”
Etc etc.
Starmer has lost his “honest but boring” USP. Which is pretty much all he had
Don't you mix with anybody smart and informed?
It's the view of most people who aren't blindly partisan. Like expenses. Dirty, cheating establishment crapping on us all. And for those that aren't just angry there's the fact BJ = arsehole has become accepted fact but disappointment and disillusionment that St Keir of the beer is too is a fresh wound. Tonight's poll might be interesting
Given past experience and nomination thresholds, it’s very possible Labour MPs will only put forward one candidate if Starmer and Rayner do go. I would be very surprised if it was more than two or three. What we can be almost 100% certain of is that there won’t be a far-left candidate. The contest is also likely to have a very short timeframe. That will work to the advantage of whoever the favourite is.
Another thought occurs to me over the ridiculous 'the curry was late' nonsense. We know it was a pre arranged dinner 'YS to order'. Are we really to believe YS didn't contact the Indian In advance and say 'here's some great publicity for you. Takeaway for a party of 30 for the leader of the opposition required for 8.30 pm' and that the Indian takeaway wouldn't have absolutely ensured dinner for LOTO was hot, tasty and on schedule?? Is the position that YS got to 7 and said 'oh shit, i haven't ordered Keirs dinner!'
There's a rather obvious problem with that. PLumping publicly for one side in politics is often dangerous for a business. Especially a local one.
Presumably not too much of a problem for the guys posing with a surprisingly upright Mary Foy MP.
Another thought occurs to me over the ridiculous 'the curry was late' nonsense. We know it was a pre arranged dinner 'YS to order'. Are we really to believe YS didn't contact the Indian In advance and say 'here's some great publicity for you. Takeaway for a party of 30 for the leader of the opposition required for 8.30 pm' and that the Indian takeaway wouldn't have absolutely ensured dinner for LOTO was hot, tasty and on schedule?? Is the position that YS got to 7 and said 'oh shit, i haven't ordered Keirs dinner!'
There's a rather obvious problem with that. PLumping publicly for one side in politics is often dangerous for a business. Especially a local one.
Well even if they didnt want the publicity, they aren't going to be late are they? It's almost certainly their biggest order of the night if not the month given nobody was supposed to be having boozy takeouts in big groups
I guess I'll say this for the last time but the markets are way behind on what is happening.
If Starmer resigns we get a shiny new Labour leader with all of the honeymoon potential up against a tainted, tawdry, PM. But I cannot see Boris Johnson resigning over this. He will only go if tory MPs boot him out and I don't see evidence for this right now.
Does this mean the next PM market WILL BE one of the current Labour pool? Of course not. But the current odds of 100/1+ on all the other Labour figures apart from SKS are ridiculously good value.
Another thought occurs to me over the ridiculous 'the curry was late' nonsense. We know it was a pre arranged dinner 'YS to order'. Are we really to believe YS didn't contact the Indian In advance and say 'here's some great publicity for you. Takeaway for a party of 30 for the leader of the opposition required for 8.30 pm' and that the Indian takeaway wouldn't have absolutely ensured dinner for LOTO was hot, tasty and on schedule?? Is the position that YS got to 7 and said 'oh shit, i haven't ordered Keirs dinner!'
Not sure CCHQ will pay you for that one. Keep trying.
Comments
So some people think eg "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Nandy, but if Nandy loses then I'd rather Starmer than Long Bailey", while others think "it must be a woman and I'm voting for Long Bailey, but Long Bailey loses then I'd rather Starmer than Nandy".
Therefore the "must be a woman" vote is split in the first round, splitting the vote and allowing the only man in the running to get a first round lead by those voting for a man and getting second preferences from those voting for a woman.
I mean, honestly - where do you draw the line? Is it OK to sing at Shrewsbury "You're Welsh, and you know you are"? How about "You're Welsh, and the sheep agree"?
"Burgon qualified as a solicitor in 2006."
It's actually very easy to imagine most frontline politicians as secondary school teachers, particularly Labour ones. I had teaches just like Corbyn (geography), Cooper (headteacher), Ed Balls (English & games), Nandy (French and Spanish), Burgon (PE), Gove (chemistry), Jess Phillips (Drama), Tugendhat (games and CCF), Rees-Mogg (RE).
To be fair Private Eye got there years ago, but it works.
I can’t imagine hell just try and avoid the issue .
In theory, you don't split the vote. But that does rely on voters using their preferences.
I think last time there was more of a "RLB - no thankyou!" vibe among the Nandyites.
Best known / gross most liked if different order
1. EdM / SKS
2. SKS / Rayner
3. Rayner / EdM
4. Yvette
5. Lammy
5. Thornberry / Ashworth
6. Ashworth / Nandy
7. Nandy / Dodds
8. Dodds / RAK
9. Shabana / Thornberry
10. Reeves / Mcmahon
11. Reynolds / Thangam
12. McMahon / Shabana
13. RAK / Reeves
14. Powell / Haigh
15. Haigh / Philipson
16. NTS / Reynolds
17. Thangam / NTS
18. Phillipson / Powell
if Starmer doesn’t resign his own and labour ratings go through the floor along with their chances of improving much on the 200 seats they currently hold. Not least because the left will go on and on about it, not only hollowing Starmer out but making the party look split hence another reason they will decline in the polls, probably at green and Libdem gain. An unpopular Labour leader and unpopular Labour Party can forget about much assistance from tactical votes too.
If Starmer went immediately it would look at least a bit principled. And it is that really what does for Boris.
Without Starmer under investigation for an FPN, Boris only danger this summer would be how to ride out getting more himself. But the voters will react alarmingly towards Boris and the Tory’s if Starmer resigns but Boris toughs it out. If Boris doesn’t follow suit in resigning, the ratings of his party (seen to be rallying around the indefensible) will go horribly through the floor forces it out of him, or forces hand of his party. So Boris is plunged into jeopardy for an inglorious end this week, thanks to the Mail’s campaign.
That is how it likely to play out next month isn’t it? Two new Party leaders in September.
“They’re all the same”
“Bunch of wankers”
“Fuck them all”
Etc etc.
Starmer has lost his “honest but boring” USP. Which is pretty much all he had
But without the "surplus votes" malarkey.
Does it become an argument of “your FPN was worse than mine”?
In the public’s view a penalty will be a penalty.
If a FPN is not received then the dividing line has already been drawn - one was worse than the other. If Labour spend the next few weeks trying to split hairs on beers vs parties vs campaign stops vs cake vs curry it will only serve to drag themselves down into the “they’re all as bad as each other” narrative.
Jess Phillips was saying it would be "embarrassing" for Labour's next leader after Corbyn not to be a woman, but when she pulled out of the race she pointedly didn't I believe back Nandy and it was said that a lot of her support went to Starmer over either of Nandy or Long Bailey.
I could understand her saying "RLB - no thank you!" but if she'd genuinely thought it must be a woman she should have backed Nandy and so should her supporters, but it seems she/they didn't.
And then lied about it, multiple times
Even if Starmer escapes a FPN people will just think “so he got lucky”
He’s either badly damaged or he’s a goner
If he does go I agree that there will then be intense pressure on Boris. Hence the Tories suddenly being all kind and understanding today
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/top-tory-faces-backlash-over-7777780
Must sing "You're Shi'ite. And you know you are."
Tautology? Are you getting up with an oxymoron?
The bigger problem for the police to wrestle is their sensible policy of no retrospective fines is now getting shredded - where will it end? Where will it end up eating up resources chasing up all these retrospective fines?
We are the party of the haves, the successful, the top 10%, the NIMBYs with nice houses, those who want to pull up the ladder behind them…
And left me in my stately home
Lazin' on a Sunni afternoon
I also doubt it affects Boris too much given Tory voters think both Boris and Starmer should stay party leaders even if both are fined
Run them all through 1, 2, 3 recognition (like the cheque pay in machine at the bank), refer dubious ones for a human steer on screen, ka-chuk, ka-chuk, quick provisional results, then hand count, real results. Only if the machine gives issues, go straight to the hand count.
I also don't know why they didn't eliminate multiple candidates at once on occasion - e.g. where the penultimate candidate obviously couldn't get votes to progress and no one could reach threshold with the transfers. Perhaps this no faster than doing one at a time.
To be fair, I think he had no option but to do this. The least worst option. If he gets a FPN then he is gone but maybe Labour will be in a better position. If he doesn't then he can say he would've gone if he had. Although the question I just suggested will still be asked.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-61373504
To suggest a lot of Keir Beer backers were genuine about their breathless condemnation of party prick in number 10 would be stretching credulity. And vice versa.
Boris was being crucified in the media without Starmer leading the attack, but he chose to go in full attack mode anyway. Now its turned around, the Tories are right not to want the spotlight back on them.
Then there is being totally dishonest about substantive issues. Or lying in parliament. Or repeatedly saying things that you have been told are untrue. In other words, total disregard for the truth. That is actually quite rare in politics, in my opinion.
I suppose it's better than the Asda Republic.
As has been commented on, we are now in a situation that investigative journalists will be trawling numerous events across the political spectrum for more sensational stories and undermining more politicians
It is just crazy, especially as this is no more than a parking fine
our PM on the right
https://twitter.com/Ukraine/status/1523649257349140481
We know it was a pre arranged dinner 'YS to order'. Are we really to believe YS didn't contact the Indian In advance and say 'here's some great publicity for you. Takeaway for a party of 30 for the leader of the opposition required for 8.30 pm' and that the Indian takeaway wouldn't have absolutely ensured dinner for LOTO was hot, tasty and on schedule?? Is the position that YS got to 7 and said 'oh shit, i haven't ordered Keirs dinner!'
In total, since 2017, Jolyon and the Good Law Project have raised a grand total of £4,228,308 from 44 Crowdjustice crowdfunders.
https://labourpainsblog.com/2022/05/09/good-law-project-fantasies-and-little-stupid-jokes/
I assume it's taken for granted that some Tory MPs are completely stupid.
-Starmer only has himself to blame for 'Beergate': he did not have to be quite so unbearably sactimonious when 'partgate' broke.
Given these rules were seemingly so easy to break for the nature of work that politicians do, a better long-term strategy for Starmer might have been to say something like: 'The Prime Minister has made a foolish error and very possibly a foolish law, if the line between acceptable and unnacceptable gatherings is so arbitrary and ambiguous that he can use a loophole to escape the penalty. This emphasises the urgent need for a public enquiry on the United Kingdom's response to the pandemic, and places the government's decisions squarely in the dock.'
As it is, he made his criticism as intensely personal, and moralising, as possible: 'Just as he has done throughout his life, he has damaged everyone and everything around him along the way.' It's very difficult to row back from this with any dignity.
P.S. If both Starmer *and* Cummings end up being fined I don't suppose Johnson would much mind. If Starmer resigns of course the pressure would be on Johnson to do the same.
And for those that aren't just angry there's the fact BJ = arsehole has become accepted fact but disappointment and disillusionment that St Keir of the beer is too is a fresh wound.
Tonight's poll might be interesting
Presumably not too much of a problem for the guys posing with a surprisingly upright Mary Foy MP.
I guess I'll say this for the last time but the markets are way behind on what is happening.
If Starmer resigns we get a shiny new Labour leader with all of the honeymoon potential up against a tainted, tawdry, PM. But I cannot see Boris Johnson resigning over this. He will only go if tory MPs boot him out and I don't see evidence for this right now.
Does this mean the next PM market WILL BE one of the current Labour pool? Of course not. But the current odds of 100/1+ on all the other Labour figures apart from SKS are ridiculously good value.