Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Thursday’s locals – the Westminster polls compared with 2019 – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,218
edited May 2023 in General
imageThursday’s locals – the Westminster polls compared with 2019 – politicalbetting.com

Thanks to David Cowling for compiling the above tables which give a real sense of how the political environment has changed since 2019 when most of the seats up on Thursday were last fought.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,981
    I miss Change UK.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    Second like the well known tax exile Brexiteer Monaco resident who is current favourite to buy Man Utd.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,780
    Roger said:

    Second like the well known tax exile Brexiteer Monaco resident who is current favourite to buy Man Utd.

    You came first and third, actually.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,010
    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Of course you both believe that, because you're both anti-Tory to your core.

    We'll see what actually happens.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,972

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,972
    FPT

    Mr Pioneer’s mention of Hollingworth Lake brought back memories. Our first home after marriage was on the shore of Hollingworth Lake. Mrs C. used to sit in the window upstairs and look out over the lake, watching the comings and goings. Happy days! I sometimes wonder why we moved South.
    Now we live about 10 miles from Colchester, and the amount of building around Colchester is amazing. Don’t seem to be any pubs or shops though.

    I could see Rakewood viaduct out of my bedroom window growing up! A spectacular part of the world that has the very real problem these days of feeling so very overcrowded...
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    Driver said:

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Of course you both believe that, because you're both anti-Tory to your core.

    We'll see what actually happens.
    After the last four years I don't think you'll find that view is unique to Mike and me!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    edited May 2023
    So the Conservative voteshare average is unchanged from where it was in April 2019 and actually up from where it was in May 2019. So the NEV results for Rishi on Friday could be spun as an increase in the Tory voteshare from May 2019.

    However the Labour voteshare is up over 10% from where it was from May 2019 so still expect significant Labour gains from the Tories. The LD voteshare though is little changed and indeed actually down from where it was in May 2019, so the Tories could even gain a few seats from the LDs as might Labour
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,246
    The key difference this time is the disappearance of the Brexit Party. Rather the conservatives are the Brexit Party. Meanwhile the Conservatives have lost the same number of votes to Labour.

    Picking up on Mike's point, it's all about coalitions. Johnson triumphed in.2019 GE because he could add the votes of the Brexit Party to the Conservatives without losing the votes of non diehard Brexiteers in his party. If Starmer can do the same with Lib Dems and Greens, it will be a landslide for him.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,468
    Driver said:

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Of course you both believe that, because you're both anti-Tory to your core.

    We'll see what actually happens.
    It's consistent with one of your complaints about Labour though- that Starmer isn't setting out a policy position, just coasting on "we're not them".

    That may well change between now and next October, but as things stand, the unpopularity of the Conservatives means that Starmer has been presented with an open goal on a sloping pitch so he doesn't even need to kick the ball in.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    FF43 said:

    The key difference this time is the disappearance of the Brexit Party. Rather the conservatives are the Brexit Party. Meanwhile the Conservatives have lost the same number of votes to Labour.

    Picking up on Mike's point, it's all about coalitions. Johnson triumphed in.2019 GE because he could add the votes of the Brexit Party to the Conservatives without losing the votes of non diehard Brexiteers in his party. If Starmer can do the same with Lib Dems and Greens, it will be a landslide for him.

    Problem is some leftwingers like BJO despise Starmer even if swing voters don't mind him and might go Green. Whereas in 2019 the right liked Boris and Boris also won swing voters
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,569
    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    It's especially complex in multi-member wards like mine where the non-Tory parties are not standing full slates and tacitly hope voters will support all of us. Standard LibDem literature from the centre say things like "Only the LibDems can win here [with misleading barchart showing disproportionate bars], Labour and Greens have no chance". I meet LibDem voters who think they shouldn't use all their 3 votes as there aren't 3 LibDems for the 3 seats, and Lab/Green voters who are too irritated by it to include a vote for the LibDem, so everyone loses out. LibDem HQ should leave it to local parties to decide the appropriate message to fit the local voting system.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    edited May 2023

    FPT

    Mr Pioneer’s mention of Hollingworth Lake brought back memories. Our first home after marriage was on the shore of Hollingworth Lake. Mrs C. used to sit in the window upstairs and look out over the lake, watching the comings and goings. Happy days! I sometimes wonder why we moved South.
    Now we live about 10 miles from Colchester, and the amount of building around Colchester is amazing. Don’t seem to be any pubs or shops though.

    I could see Rakewood viaduct out of my bedroom window growing up! A spectacular part of the world that has the very real problem these days of feeling so very overcrowded...
    I was invited to Hebden Bridge recently. A very interesting part of the country. Not as gritty as in Martin Parr's time but the hippies and lesbians are still there in numbers
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,972
    FF43 said:

    The key difference this time is the disappearance of the Brexit Party. Rather the conservatives are the Brexit Party. Meanwhile the Conservatives have lost the same number of votes to Labour.

    Picking up on Mike's point, it's all about coalitions. Johnson triumphed in.2019 GE because he could add the votes of the Brexit Party to the Conservatives without losing the votes of non diehard Brexiteers in his party. If Starmer can do the same with Lib Dems and Greens, it will be a landslide for him.

    The thing that so many seem to forget is that it isn't all Labour vs Conservative. In so many places the opposition to the Tories are the LibDems. A swing to the yellow pox from the Tories won't help Labour add to its councillors / councils tally on Thursday. But it does point the way towards how much anti-Corruption tactical voting we will get at the GE.

    I got blocked on Twitter by Tom Blenkinsop - who has turned into some kind of Labour absolutist - when I pointed out that the path to a big Labour win is for people in Surrey Heath and Esher and similar places to vote LibDem, not Labour.

    So my watchout in the locals is the vote against the Tories more than it is the vote for Labour. I also hear that Labour on Teesside remain as riven, disorganised and arrogant as ever. They have utterly failed to go after the Teesworks corruption scandal because they are unable to speak across the various CLPs without factionalism getting in the way. Meanwhile the Tories under the figurehead of Ben Houchen International Airport are unified because they successfully purged anyone who disagrees with handing hundreds of millions over to a few select developers for nothing.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,081

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    Change UK were hilarious. But also exciting. There was a constant drip, drip of news; it felt like - despite the permanent shambles - perhaps there could have been a realignment on the left? Perhaps Corbyn's lot could have been marginalised? Centrists I knew were hopeful. In retrospect, they were nowhere near and probably at least a year too late. But still - an enjoyable moment.

    I don't know whose situation is more unfortunate, really: the UK, where centrists have to awkwardly cohabit with the far left (or occasionally the ERG); or France, where there is a choice of either centrists, smug and aloof, or the far left or the far right.
    Here, I have a choice of at least three big(gish) parties; I may not like any of them much but all are more sane than not, and if one were to alienate me too much I have elsewhere to turn. In France, I can imagine no situation whatsoever in which I wouldn't reluctantly vote for LREM - with the result that LREM can basically do what it wants.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    ydoethur said:

    Roger said:

    Second like the well known tax exile Brexiteer Monaco resident who is current favourite to buy Man Utd.

    You came first and third, actually.
    Doesn't that warrant a pedant award?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,168
    Off topic (probably), least reassuring description on eBay for a used piece of clothing ever: from a smoke free, lice free house.

    Could be a metaphor for some political marketing I guess.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,223
    19th like Everton.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,914
    HYUFD said:

    So the Conservative voteshare average is unchanged from where it was in April 2019 and actually up from where it was in May 2019. So the NEV results for Rishi on Friday could be spun as an increase in the Tory voteshare from May 2019.

    However the Labour voteshare is up over 10% from where it was from May 2019 so still expect significant Labour gains from the Tories. The LD voteshare though is little changed and indeed actually down from where it was in May 2019, so the Tories could even gain a few seats from the LDs as might Labour

    Remember the rules. Conservatives outperform the polls and Labour underperform.

    I believe today is the day when the verdict is delivered that Gray broke the Civil Service code and she will be barred from working for a year for Labour, apparently Case wanted the ban to be substantially longer. So he's not partisan at all. No siree.

    So the PB narrative can once again be that of Rishi again crushing the hopeless, hapless Sir Softie.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,914
    Roger said:

    ydoethur said:

    Roger said:

    Second like the well known tax exile Brexiteer Monaco resident who is current favourite to buy Man Utd.

    You came first and third, actually.
    Doesn't that warrant a pedant award?
    A gold and a bronze medal?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,972
    Cookie said:

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    Change UK were hilarious. But also exciting. There was a constant drip, drip of news; it felt like - despite the permanent shambles - perhaps there could have been a realignment on the left? Perhaps Corbyn's lot could have been marginalised? Centrists I knew were hopeful. In retrospect, they were nowhere near and probably at least a year too late. But still - an enjoyable moment.

    I don't know whose situation is more unfortunate, really: the UK, where centrists have to awkwardly cohabit with the far left (or occasionally the ERG); or France, where there is a choice of either centrists, smug and aloof, or the far left or the far right.
    Here, I have a choice of at least three big(gish) parties; I may not like any of them much but all are more sane than not, and if one were to alienate me too much I have elsewhere to turn. In France, I can imagine no situation whatsoever in which I wouldn't reluctantly vote for LREM - with the result that LREM can basically do what it wants.

    There *could* have been a realignment. But they had a rather basic problem in that they stood against things rather than for things. The Labour defectors were against Corbynism. The Tory defectors were against Boris. Good start, but once they got past the "lets do better politics" objective they managed to not actually agree on much else.

    How on earth you can do factionalist infighting when you have so few MPs was truly impressive.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983
    edited May 2023

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    I heard Anna Soubry on something the other day waxing lyrical about Keir Starmer. Probably not something to share with BJO but she was was clearly hooked.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,049
    Sunny, leafy, very affluent Hampshire I would say 50:50 LD/Cons. Both have double-barrelled names if that makes any difference to the price of eggs.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,981
    TOPPING said:

    Sunny, leafy, very affluent Hampshire I would say 50:50 LD/Cons. Both have double-barrelled names if that makes any difference to the price of eggs.

    Shows how standards have slipped in this country.

    Having a double-barrelled surname was a sign of class and elitism, today it means your mum’s a slapper.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,177

    Just working out a fantasy "do fuck all for the rest of my life" strategy:

    (1) Buy a 2 or 3 bed semi/flat in Sunderland (or similar) for £100k, cash. No mortgage. Most who cash out down South in their early 40s can probably do this.
    (2) Core expenses council tax/water/gas/electricity/broadband/TV licence etc. £450 pcm?
    (3) Transport/fuel - let's say £150 pcm
    (4) Food, drink, purchases and "fun" say £400 pcm

    Basically, if you can derive £1,000pcm+ and you're mortgage free you can do whatever you like for the rest of your life, I think.

    You'd probably need £400-450k of investments to draw on to generate it. Or you could do 'any' min wage job 4 days a week.

    But, you do have to live in Sunderland. And it's not like you can go on adventure holidays.

    I remember when unsellable houses in Sunderland were quite the scandal. Asylum seekers were being given "free" homes. As you propose they wouldn't be working (as not allowed) and would basically sit there doing nothing (as you propose).

    Two problems with this freedom thing. One, the homes at the price bracket you mention are in exciting places like Plains Farm and Sliksworth. Back in the day the asylum seekers went into houses in Hendon's "Murder Mile" where *nobody* wanted to live.

    The idea of buying a house on Plains Farm is funny, especially to sit and do nothing. You'd get branded a paedo and wake up on fire. There is a reason you can buy a home for that kind of money there - it is hell.
    Good morning

    Last year a detached 3 bedroom bungalow close to us sold for £425,000

    The same bungalow has just been resold for £575,000 which is insane

    Indeed we have a newly built apartment complex with prices upto £950,000

    The price increases are astonishing and many put it down to wealthy English homeowners moving into this beautiful part of Wales

    Of course there is anger at the use of some of these homes as holiday homes and councils are imposing much increased council tax premiums

    You can increase house building, but the evidence indicates these developments are sold out at similar high prices even before they are completed

    I am simply amazed and do not have any idea how this resolved
    The problem is that house building has not kept pace with the population.

    The housing “debt” is huge.

    The only long term solution is to “pay down” the debt by building more houses.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,260
    Is that Sir Denis Huntington-Smythe, now approaching his '70s, against Tamsin "Fizz" Fletcher-Ouse, the former 1990's dance music artist ? A close race that a lot of people will be watching, I understand.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281
    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,049

    TOPPING said:

    Sunny, leafy, very affluent Hampshire I would say 50:50 LD/Cons. Both have double-barrelled names if that makes any difference to the price of eggs.

    Shows how standards have slipped in this country.

    Having a double-barrelled surname was a sign of class and elitism, today it means your mum’s a slapper.
    Interestingly there is a (the?!) Richard Needham standing for the Greens in that seat. Now if it were *the* Richard Needham that would up the net worth and posho quotient of the contest somewhat.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,972
    Roger said:

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    I heard Anna Soubry on something the other day waxing lyrical about Keir Starmer. Probably not something to share with BJO but she was was clearly hooked.
    Proof that he is a Tory obviously...
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,843
    edited May 2023
    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,049
    LOL it most certainly is not *the* Richard Needham...

    https://winchester.greenparty.org.uk/people/
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983

    Off topic (probably), least reassuring description on eBay for a used piece of clothing ever: from a smoke free, lice free house.

    Could be a metaphor for some political marketing I guess.

    An ideal opening shot for Labour's next PPB. The one I did for the Lib Dems entitled 'Maggies Broken Britain' opened on some contrasty black and white shots of derelict high rises which I always thought were a little crude. That ad would have been much stronger
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,260
    edited May 2023
    Is oxfordshire outside the city still true blue ?

    I remember that gleeful "We're out" farmer's billboard on the road to Oxford a few years ago after the referendum. I suspect the same farmer is probably now less pleased.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,081
    A day out in the High Peak yesterday. Party flags little in evidence, but what few there were Labour. (I'm no marketer, but I'm pleased to see Labour in High Peak have done what I have often suggested and gone with a punchy red-and-white colour scheme, rather than alarming red-and-yellow. Much easier on the eye and less danger-don't-go-near-this-lot).

    The High Lane area of Stockport, meanwhile (Marple South ward - or was last time I looked, at any rate), was comfortably Lib Dem (with posters for the Lib Dems in most cases on the same houses as posters opposing new development in High Lane).

    We did a satisfying walk from Edale around Lords Seat and Mam Tor. Mam Tor, by the way, was absolutely heaving. Which delights me. There was something of a carnival atmosphere at the top: some of these people were serious all-the-kit walkers on longer hikes, but many were clearly park-at-the-bottom-and-a-quick-half-hour-to-the-top types, and some were clearly doing it for the first time and appeared tremendously pleased with their achievement in getting to the top and surprised and impressed by the reward in doing so. Hopefully some of these will be motivated to come back and explore more of the high areas of their country.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    It will be interesting to see how the Greens do in flagship Brighton - finally had a piece of leafleting from them over the Bank Holiday - (and after the postal ballot went in) I suspect they are resting on their laurels. So far it’s been Independents (1 each) and Labour 2 - zero from Con or LibDem.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,168
    Roger said:

    Off topic (probably), least reassuring description on eBay for a used piece of clothing ever: from a smoke free, lice free house.

    Could be a metaphor for some political marketing I guess.

    An ideal opening shot for Labour's next PPB. The one I did for the Lib Dems entitled 'Maggies Broken Britain' opened on some contrasty black and white shots of derelict high rises which I always thought were a little crude. That ad would have been much stronger
    They are the party of smoke and lice.

    No we’re not!

    Ha ha, forced to deny it, no smoke (& lice) without fire!
    Etc
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    The whole population of Brexitshire I would imagine.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,443
    In Belgium, when kids have their school holidays will depend on what language they speak
    French-speaking primary and secondary school pupils will no longer be on holiday at the same time as their Dutch-speaking peers.

    https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/05/01/in-belgium-when-kids-have-their-school-holidays-will-depend-on-what-language-they-speak_6025024_4.html (English, £££)

    I suppose we do something similar, with Scotland especially having its own term dates, and even some small variations between local authorities.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,081

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    More than you would expect, I think.

    I remember when I was a student, a fellow student being unsure whether then-Prime-Minister John Major was Conservative or Labour. She wasn't stupid - she went on to be an optician - just not really interested in current affairs. And that was in the days of four channels and no Netflix, when news was rather less avoidable than it is now.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    If I was going to pick a legal fight, Joanna Cherry KC would be a very long way down the list of people I'd want to pick it with 😳

    https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/1653059178552868866?s=20
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,010

    Driver said:

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Of course you both believe that, because you're both anti-Tory to your core.

    We'll see what actually happens.
    It's consistent with one of your complaints about Labour though- that Starmer isn't setting out a policy position, just coasting on "we're not them".

    That may well change between now and next October, but as things stand, the unpopularity of the Conservatives means that Starmer has been presented with an open goal on a sloping pitch so he doesn't even need to kick the ball in.
    He thinks so, at least. But as I said, we'll see.
  • Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    You post a bit on a website, hardly makes you Einstein, does it?
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    Cookie said:

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    Change UK were hilarious. But also exciting. There was a constant drip, drip of news; it felt like - despite the permanent shambles - perhaps there could have been a realignment on the left? Perhaps Corbyn's lot could have been marginalised? Centrists I knew were hopeful. In retrospect, they were nowhere near and probably at least a year too late. But still - an enjoyable moment.

    I don't know whose situation is more unfortunate, really: the UK, where centrists have to awkwardly cohabit with the far left (or occasionally the ERG); or France, where there is a choice of either centrists, smug and aloof, or the far left or the far right.
    Here, I have a choice of at least three big(gish) parties; I may not like any of them much but all are more sane than not, and if one were to alienate me too much I have elsewhere to turn. In France, I can imagine no situation whatsoever in which I wouldn't reluctantly vote for LREM - with the result that LREM can basically do what it wants.

    Change UK wasn’t a terrible idea. It was just utterly cack handed execution. Which is a shame. I’d like a new party to come in and shake things up, but sadly given how much of a balls up CUK made I suspect it will be some time before anyone tries again.

    Also, terrible party name.
    It was a really shit name which, in its amateurishness inadvertently signalled that it wasn't really a party, more a disgruntled band of exiles.

    Political parties in democracies oughtn't to grow from the top down anyway. They should've all just jumped to the LDs. I did feel for Luciana Berger though, who received an absolute torrent of hideous abuse*.

    *Esp from the Momentum dolts. I wonder what set her apart for particularly nasty treatment? It's truly a mystery.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,914

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    Come off it.

    We all know Boris Johnson was a socialist Prime Minister from his big state, big government, high taxation fiscal policy.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,443
    Nigelb said:

    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)

    Maybe the Bank of England should include a profit-sharing clause in the next buyout it arranges, or perhaps criterion-based like some football transfers.
  • Roger said:


    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    The whole population of Brexitshire I would imagine.
    Rog, why? Why do you say such snobby, pompous shite? It's just lazy.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Cookie said:

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    More than you would expect, I think.

    I remember when I was a student, a fellow student being unsure whether then-Prime-Minister John Major was Conservative or Labour. She wasn't stupid - she went on to be an optician - just not really interested in current affairs. And that was in the days of four channels and no Netflix, when news was rather less avoidable than it is now.
    Yeah, for us politically engaged types it is very easy to forget how little interest many folk have in politics. This is why Boris was an election winner - he cut through (as did, in different ways, Thatcher and Blair).

    I wouldn't characterise it as not being clever though. It's a bit like saying I'm stupid because I don't know who won the Six Nations.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,240

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    It's especially complex in multi-member wards like mine where the non-Tory parties are not standing full slates and tacitly hope voters will support all of us. Standard LibDem literature from the centre say things like "Only the LibDems can win here [with misleading barchart showing disproportionate bars], Labour and Greens have no chance". I meet LibDem voters who think they shouldn't use all their 3 votes as there aren't 3 LibDems for the 3 seats, and Lab/Green voters who are too irritated by it to include a vote for the LibDem, so everyone loses out. LibDem HQ should leave it to local parties to decide the appropriate message to fit the local voting system.
    An Oxford Labour councillor is currently sitting as an Independent after being suspended for tweeting the blindingly obvious "Vote for the LibDem candidate" in the North Shropshire by-election, so I wouldn't say this HQ attitude is unique to the LibDems.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,081

    In Belgium, when kids have their school holidays will depend on what language they speak
    French-speaking primary and secondary school pupils will no longer be on holiday at the same time as their Dutch-speaking peers.

    https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/05/01/in-belgium-when-kids-have-their-school-holidays-will-depend-on-what-language-they-speak_6025024_4.html (English, £££)

    I suppose we do something similar, with Scotland especially having its own term dates, and even some small variations between local authorities.

    Parental opinion is divided on the merits of this.
    On one hand, when your authority has a half term out of synch with everyone else's, it's an opportunity for a holiday you wouldn't normally be able to afford. On the other, for those with children whose schools are out of step with each other - or who are teachers in a different authority to that of their kids - it can be a right pain in the arse.
  • FeersumEnjineeyaFeersumEnjineeya Posts: 4,499
    edited May 2023

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    You post a bit on a website, hardly makes you Einstein, does it?



    Roger said:


    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    The whole population of Brexitshire I would imagine.
    Rog, why? Why do you say such snobby, pompous shite? It's just lazy.
    Not in a mood to suffer fools today? :-)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,177

    Nigelb said:

    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)

    Maybe the Bank of England should include a profit-sharing clause in the next buyout it arranges, or perhaps criterion-based like some football transfers.
    The problem there is that HSBC took a risk. Trying to nationalise profit and privatise loss is just as silly as the other way round.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,443

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    Come off it.

    We all know Boris Johnson was a socialist Prime Minister from his big state, big government, high taxation fiscal policy.
    It is surprising how many Conservative MPs assert theirs is the party of strong defence, low taxes and a small state, despite the evidence pointing the other way.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,920

    TOPPING said:

    Sunny, leafy, very affluent Hampshire I would say 50:50 LD/Cons. Both have double-barrelled names if that makes any difference to the price of eggs.

    Shows how standards have slipped in this country.

    Having a double-barrelled surname was a sign of class and elitism, today it means your mum’s a slapper.
    Is that true, Mr Screaming-Eagles?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,443

    Nigelb said:

    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)

    Maybe the Bank of England should include a profit-sharing clause in the next buyout it arranges, or perhaps criterion-based like some football transfers.
    The problem there is that HSBC took a risk. Trying to nationalise profit and privatise loss is just as silly as the other way round.
    Sharing, not nationalising.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,217
    The Lib Dems had a huge uplift in the 2019 locals. I think the conditions for that were rather exceptional: these plus the Euros later in May were very much Brexit elections and once the wind started going out of ChangeUK the Lib Dems became the party for remainers to "send a message". That dynamic isn't there this time.

    Still, with the total LLG vote seeming that much higher this time there may still be tactical opportunity for them in seats where they are the obvious main challenger. Quite possibly offset by losses in other areas where Labour come through. The LD-Lab swing in parts of the South looks quite significant.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,246
    edited May 2023

    FF43 said:

    The key difference this time is the disappearance of the Brexit Party. Rather the conservatives are the Brexit Party. Meanwhile the Conservatives have lost the same number of votes to Labour.

    Picking up on Mike's point, it's all about coalitions. Johnson triumphed in.2019 GE because he could add the votes of the Brexit Party to the Conservatives without losing the votes of non diehard Brexiteers in his party. If Starmer can do the same with Lib Dems and Greens, it will be a landslide for him.

    The thing that so many seem to forget is that it isn't all Labour vs Conservative. In so many places the opposition to the Tories are the LibDems. A swing to the yellow pox from the Tories won't help Labour add to its councillors / councils tally on Thursday. But it does point the way towards how much anti-Corruption tactical voting we will get at the GE.

    I got blocked on Twitter by Tom Blenkinsop - who has turned into some kind of Labour absolutist - when I pointed out that the path to a big Labour win is for people in Surrey Heath and Esher and similar places to vote LibDem, not Labour.

    So my watchout in the locals is the vote against the Tories more than it is the vote for Labour. I also hear that Labour on Teesside remain as riven, disorganised and arrogant as ever. They have utterly failed to go after the Teesworks corruption scandal because they are unable to speak across the various CLPs without factionalism getting in the way. Meanwhile the Tories under the figurehead of Ben Houchen International Airport are unified because they successfully purged anyone who disagrees with handing hundreds of millions over to a few select developers for nothing.
    The psephology point is that while tactical voting helps the Lib Dems get a foot in the door, it helps Labour a lot more in terms of number of extra seats.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,240

    Is oxfordshire outside the city still true blue ?

    Heavens no.

    The county council is run by an LD/Lab/Green alliance. Of the districts, the city is Labour, one rural district is LD, another is LD/Green, a third is LD/Lab/Green. Only one district (Cherwell) is still Con.

    Good rundown of the 2023 locals for Oxfordshire here: https://oxfordclarion.uk/local-elections-preview-2023/
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,550
    In St Albans I expect some Conservative gains from Lib Dems.

    Last year was an all up election due to ward boundary changes resulting in 50 Lib Dem, 4 C,1 G and 1 Independent.

    18 seats are up this year with 16 LD 1C and 1G defending.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,592

    Nigelb said:

    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)

    Maybe the Bank of England should include a profit-sharing clause in the next buyout it arranges, or perhaps criterion-based like some football transfers.
    The problem there is that HSBC took a risk. Trying to nationalise profit and privatise loss is just as silly as the other way round.
    Except everyone on here who knows anything about finance said at the time that HSBC got a billy bargain when they were given the option to buy it....

    It really, really wasn't much of a risk...
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Cookie said:

    In Belgium, when kids have their school holidays will depend on what language they speak
    French-speaking primary and secondary school pupils will no longer be on holiday at the same time as their Dutch-speaking peers.

    https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/05/01/in-belgium-when-kids-have-their-school-holidays-will-depend-on-what-language-they-speak_6025024_4.html (English, £££)

    I suppose we do something similar, with Scotland especially having its own term dates, and even some small variations between local authorities.

    Parental opinion is divided on the merits of this.
    On one hand, when your authority has a half term out of synch with everyone else's, it's an opportunity for a holiday you wouldn't normally be able to afford. On the other, for those with children whose schools are out of step with each other - or who are teachers in a different authority to that of their kids - it can be a right pain in the arse.
    My wife's a teacher so it helps when the kids and her terms are in sync (they're currently all Stockport so it's broadly fine, but they'll be going to secondary in Manchester which occasionally has different half terms - not sure why tbh).

    TBF she would rather their hols were not synched up though.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983

    Roger said:


    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    The whole population of Brexitshire I would imagine.
    Rog, why? Why do you say such snobby, pompous shite? It's just lazy.
    You're right. I should have anger management sessions or take up one of the religions where they teach forgiveness but at the moment I'm more angry with the Brexiteers than I have been any time in the last seven years.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,972
    A nice singing warm-up for this weekend https://twitter.com/PoliticsJOE_UK/status/1653322675882967040
  • Roger said:


    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    The whole population of Brexitshire I would imagine.
    Rog, why? Why do you say such snobby, pompous shite? It's just lazy.
    Not in a mood to suffer fools today? :-)
    It just winds me up when posters say blatant bollocks about the general population.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,972
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The key difference this time is the disappearance of the Brexit Party. Rather the conservatives are the Brexit Party. Meanwhile the Conservatives have lost the same number of votes to Labour.

    Picking up on Mike's point, it's all about coalitions. Johnson triumphed in.2019 GE because he could add the votes of the Brexit Party to the Conservatives without losing the votes of non diehard Brexiteers in his party. If Starmer can do the same with Lib Dems and Greens, it will be a landslide for him.

    The thing that so many seem to forget is that it isn't all Labour vs Conservative. In so many places the opposition to the Tories are the LibDems. A swing to the yellow pox from the Tories won't help Labour add to its councillors / councils tally on Thursday. But it does point the way towards how much anti-Corruption tactical voting we will get at the GE.

    I got blocked on Twitter by Tom Blenkinsop - who has turned into some kind of Labour absolutist - when I pointed out that the path to a big Labour win is for people in Surrey Heath and Esher and similar places to vote LibDem, not Labour.

    So my watchout in the locals is the vote against the Tories more than it is the vote for Labour. I also hear that Labour on Teesside remain as riven, disorganised and arrogant as ever. They have utterly failed to go after the Teesworks corruption scandal because they are unable to speak across the various CLPs without factionalism getting in the way. Meanwhile the Tories under the figurehead of Ben Houchen International Airport are unified because they successfully purged anyone who disagrees with handing hundreds of millions over to a few select developers for nothing.
    The psephology point has that while tactical voting helps the Lib Dems get a foot in the door, it helps Labour a lot more in terms of number of extra seats.
    Exactly. Tactical voting won Blair two landslides, then removed May's majority, then delivered Boris an 80 majority. Blinding voting for any party locally because of the situation nationally is stupid.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,476
    FPT
    ydoethur said:

    Taz said:
    He cites Versailles as a good example of reparations being possible. Because that went really well…
    Following the example of Versailles, the descendants of slaveowners would pay around 13% of what was deemed modest and reasonable.
    There was also something about using force to try and overturn the settlement. I’m not sure that this academic has fully thought this one through
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,081
    Ghedebrav said:

    Cookie said:

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    Change UK were hilarious. But also exciting. There was a constant drip, drip of news; it felt like - despite the permanent shambles - perhaps there could have been a realignment on the left? Perhaps Corbyn's lot could have been marginalised? Centrists I knew were hopeful. In retrospect, they were nowhere near and probably at least a year too late. But still - an enjoyable moment.

    I don't know whose situation is more unfortunate, really: the UK, where centrists have to awkwardly cohabit with the far left (or occasionally the ERG); or France, where there is a choice of either centrists, smug and aloof, or the far left or the far right.
    Here, I have a choice of at least three big(gish) parties; I may not like any of them much but all are more sane than not, and if one were to alienate me too much I have elsewhere to turn. In France, I can imagine no situation whatsoever in which I wouldn't reluctantly vote for LREM - with the result that LREM can basically do what it wants.

    Change UK wasn’t a terrible idea. It was just utterly cack handed execution. Which is a shame. I’d like a new party to come in and shake things up, but sadly given how much of a balls up CUK made I suspect it will be some time before anyone tries again.

    Also, terrible party name.
    It was a really shit name which, in its amateurishness inadvertently signalled that it wasn't really a party, more a disgruntled band of exiles.

    Political parties in democracies oughtn't to grow from the top down anyway. They should've all just jumped to the LDs. I did feel for Luciana Berger though, who received an absolute torrent of hideous abuse*.

    *Esp from the Momentum dolts. I wonder what set her apart for particularly nasty treatment? It's truly a mystery.
    I think it would be better if parties could grow from the bottom up, but our system discourages that.

    They should have jumped to the LDs, but the fact that they didn't shows the nadir the LDs were in at the time.
    CUK: We need a party outside the big two!
    LDs: er...
    CUK: And we need a party which prioritises overturning the referendum!
    LDs: well as it happens...
    CUK: If only there was a party which would take this approach! What can we do?
    LDs: we're just over here...
    CUK: Can you hear something? No? OK - we'll just have to start our own party.
    LDs: Oh. Anyway, trans-toilets...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,177

    Nigelb said:

    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)

    Maybe the Bank of England should include a profit-sharing clause in the next buyout it arranges, or perhaps criterion-based like some football transfers.
    The problem there is that HSBC took a risk. Trying to nationalise profit and privatise loss is just as silly as the other way round.
    Sharing, not nationalising.
    In such a situation, if you say that you will take a chunk of any profits, but not a chunk of any losses, what do you think that should be called?
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    I wouldn't blame anyone for not knowing who my MP is; I forget her name myself sometimes. Fully expect her to get booted next time around anyway. A lot of people will have forgettable nonentities representing them in parliament.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,260
    edited May 2023

    Is oxfordshire outside the city still true blue ?

    Heavens no.

    The county council is run by an LD/Lab/Green alliance. Of the districts, the city is Labour, one rural district is LD, another is LD/Green, a third is LD/Lab/Green. Only one district (Cherwell) is still Con.

    Good rundown of the 2023 locals for Oxfordshire here: https://oxfordclarion.uk/local-elections-preview-2023/
    Ah I see, thanks ; so it's more like the county is becoming a Greater Oxford. I always thought of Oxfordshire as Cameron and Witney, etc.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,476

    HYUFD said:

    So the Conservative voteshare average is unchanged from where it was in April 2019 and actually up from where it was in May 2019. So the NEV results for Rishi on Friday could be spun as an increase in the Tory voteshare from May 2019.

    However the Labour voteshare is up over 10% from where it was from May 2019 so still expect significant Labour gains from the Tories. The LD voteshare though is little changed and indeed actually down from where it was in May 2019, so the Tories could even gain a few seats from the LDs as might Labour

    Remember the rules. Conservatives outperform the polls and Labour underperform.

    I believe today is the day when the verdict is delivered that Gray broke the Civil Service code and she will be barred from working for a year for Labour, apparently Case wanted the ban to be substantially longer. So he's not partisan at all. No siree.

    So the PB narrative can once again be that of Rishi again crushing the hopeless, hapless Sir Softie.
    Case isn’t partisan. Vindictive, sure, but not partisan

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    The hypocrisy of Anna Soubry was quite something. She was a regular on TV berating rebellious BOO Tory MPs for not being loyal to Cameron and telling them they should be 'bashing lefties' (lovely woman) instead of attacking the leadership.

    Then when the winds changed, being loyal to the leadership and 'bashing lefties' became attacking the leadership and defecting to start a new party with the lefties.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,468
    Ghedebrav said:

    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    I wouldn't blame anyone for not knowing who my MP is; I forget her name myself sometimes. Fully expect her to get booted next time around anyway. A lot of people will have forgettable nonentities representing them in parliament.
    And some of us envy people in that situation.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,592
    Ghedebrav said:

    Cookie said:

    In Belgium, when kids have their school holidays will depend on what language they speak
    French-speaking primary and secondary school pupils will no longer be on holiday at the same time as their Dutch-speaking peers.

    https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/05/01/in-belgium-when-kids-have-their-school-holidays-will-depend-on-what-language-they-speak_6025024_4.html (English, £££)

    I suppose we do something similar, with Scotland especially having its own term dates, and even some small variations between local authorities.

    Parental opinion is divided on the merits of this.
    On one hand, when your authority has a half term out of synch with everyone else's, it's an opportunity for a holiday you wouldn't normally be able to afford. On the other, for those with children whose schools are out of step with each other - or who are teachers in a different authority to that of their kids - it can be a right pain in the arse.
    My wife's a teacher so it helps when the kids and her terms are in sync (they're currently all Stockport so it's broadly fine, but they'll be going to secondary in Manchester which occasionally has different half terms - not sure why tbh).

    TBF she would rather their hols were not synched up though.
    Round here holiday's aren't 100% synced because the Catholic schools always take Easter Week off (because of Lourdes) so Easter holiday's and Feb half term often don't match.

    The grief I got one year (as a Governor) when we followed the Catholic calendar (because it made way more sense when you looked at the teaching weeks) is something I don't want to remember.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,443

    Nigelb said:

    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)

    Maybe the Bank of England should include a profit-sharing clause in the next buyout it arranges, or perhaps criterion-based like some football transfers.
    The problem there is that HSBC took a risk. Trying to nationalise profit and privatise loss is just as silly as the other way round.
    Sharing, not nationalising.
    In such a situation, if you say that you will take a chunk of any profits, but not a chunk of any losses, what do you think that should be called?
    This is a fairly common arrangement, I gather, even in football transfers, or as discussed on the last thread, student loans. It should in my view be spread more widely, not just to this bank takeover but also to business support loans more widely.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,714
    Cookie said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Cookie said:

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    Change UK were hilarious. But also exciting. There was a constant drip, drip of news; it felt like - despite the permanent shambles - perhaps there could have been a realignment on the left? Perhaps Corbyn's lot could have been marginalised? Centrists I knew were hopeful. In retrospect, they were nowhere near and probably at least a year too late. But still - an enjoyable moment.

    I don't know whose situation is more unfortunate, really: the UK, where centrists have to awkwardly cohabit with the far left (or occasionally the ERG); or France, where there is a choice of either centrists, smug and aloof, or the far left or the far right.
    Here, I have a choice of at least three big(gish) parties; I may not like any of them much but all are more sane than not, and if one were to alienate me too much I have elsewhere to turn. In France, I can imagine no situation whatsoever in which I wouldn't reluctantly vote for LREM - with the result that LREM can basically do what it wants.

    Change UK wasn’t a terrible idea. It was just utterly cack handed execution. Which is a shame. I’d like a new party to come in and shake things up, but sadly given how much of a balls up CUK made I suspect it will be some time before anyone tries again.

    Also, terrible party name.
    It was a really shit name which, in its amateurishness inadvertently signalled that it wasn't really a party, more a disgruntled band of exiles.

    Political parties in democracies oughtn't to grow from the top down anyway. They should've all just jumped to the LDs. I did feel for Luciana Berger though, who received an absolute torrent of hideous abuse*.

    *Esp from the Momentum dolts. I wonder what set her apart for particularly nasty treatment? It's truly a mystery.
    I think it would be better if parties could grow from the bottom up, but our system discourages that.

    They should have jumped to the LDs, but the fact that they didn't shows the nadir the LDs were in at the time.
    CUK: We need a party outside the big two!
    LDs: er...
    CUK: And we need a party which prioritises overturning the referendum!
    LDs: well as it happens...
    CUK: If only there was a party which would take this approach! What can we do?
    LDs: we're just over here...
    CUK: Can you hear something? No? OK - we'll just have to start our own party.
    LDs: Oh. Anyway, trans-toilets...
    Wasn't Vince Cable involved in the talks about setting up ChUK, to the extent that he missed a vital Brexit vote over it? That's my vague recollection at least.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,468

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    The key difference this time is the disappearance of the Brexit Party. Rather the conservatives are the Brexit Party. Meanwhile the Conservatives have lost the same number of votes to Labour.

    Picking up on Mike's point, it's all about coalitions. Johnson triumphed in.2019 GE because he could add the votes of the Brexit Party to the Conservatives without losing the votes of non diehard Brexiteers in his party. If Starmer can do the same with Lib Dems and Greens, it will be a landslide for him.

    The thing that so many seem to forget is that it isn't all Labour vs Conservative. In so many places the opposition to the Tories are the LibDems. A swing to the yellow pox from the Tories won't help Labour add to its councillors / councils tally on Thursday. But it does point the way towards how much anti-Corruption tactical voting we will get at the GE.

    I got blocked on Twitter by Tom Blenkinsop - who has turned into some kind of Labour absolutist - when I pointed out that the path to a big Labour win is for people in Surrey Heath and Esher and similar places to vote LibDem, not Labour.

    So my watchout in the locals is the vote against the Tories more than it is the vote for Labour. I also hear that Labour on Teesside remain as riven, disorganised and arrogant as ever. They have utterly failed to go after the Teesworks corruption scandal because they are unable to speak across the various CLPs without factionalism getting in the way. Meanwhile the Tories under the figurehead of Ben Houchen International Airport are unified because they successfully purged anyone who disagrees with handing hundreds of millions over to a few select developers for nothing.
    The psephology point has that while tactical voting helps the Lib Dems get a foot in the door, it helps Labour a lot more in terms of number of extra seats.
    Exactly. Tactical voting won Blair two landslides, then removed May's majority, then delivered Boris an 80 majority. Blinding voting for any party locally because of the situation nationally is stupid.
    And the moral of that is that, if the public mood is to kick the rascals out, enough voters work out what to do.

    If in doubt, look out the window. If the view is "leafy" or you can see a cathedral, vote Lib Dem. If you can see a University or a lack of leaves, vote Labour.

    If that doesn't work, ask yourself whether Focus leaflets are so numerous that you have to have a separate recycling bin for them. If you do, you may live in a Lib Dem target.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,476
    Cookie said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Cookie said:

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    Change UK were hilarious. But also exciting. There was a constant drip, drip of news; it felt like - despite the permanent shambles - perhaps there could have been a realignment on the left? Perhaps Corbyn's lot could have been marginalised? Centrists I knew were hopeful. In retrospect, they were nowhere near and probably at least a year too late. But still - an enjoyable moment.

    I don't know whose situation is more unfortunate, really: the UK, where centrists have to awkwardly cohabit with the far left (or occasionally the ERG); or France, where there is a choice of either centrists, smug and aloof, or the far left or the far right.
    Here, I have a choice of at least three big(gish) parties; I may not like any of them much but all are more sane than not, and if one were to alienate me too much I have elsewhere to turn. In France, I can imagine no situation whatsoever in which I wouldn't reluctantly vote for LREM - with the result that LREM can basically do what it wants.

    Change UK wasn’t a terrible idea. It was just utterly cack handed execution. Which is a shame. I’d like a new party to come in and shake things up, but sadly given how much of a balls up CUK made I suspect it will be some time before anyone tries again.

    Also, terrible party name.
    It was a really shit name which, in its amateurishness inadvertently signalled that it wasn't really a party, more a disgruntled band of exiles.

    Political parties in democracies oughtn't to grow from the top down anyway. They should've all just jumped to the LDs. I did feel for Luciana Berger though, who received an absolute torrent of hideous abuse*.

    *Esp from the Momentum dolts. I wonder what set her apart for particularly nasty treatment? It's truly a mystery.
    I think it would be better if parties could grow from the bottom up, but our system discourages that.

    They should have jumped to the LDs, but the fact that they didn't shows the nadir the LDs were in at the time.
    CUK: We need a party outside the big two!
    LDs: er...
    CUK: And we need a party which prioritises overturning the referendum!
    LDs: well as it happens...
    CUK: If only there was a party which would take this approach! What can we do?
    LDs: we're just over here...
    CUK: Can you hear something? No? OK - we'll just have to start our own party.
    LDs: Oh. Anyway, trans-toilets...
    IIRC the LibDems didn’t want them. They wanted leadership roles immediately…
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175

    Roger said:


    Roger said:

    "I tend to regard LAB voting intention to signify being anti-Tory and that people will vote in their elections for the party locally they perceive as being most likely to beat the Conservatives".

    I'm sure that's correct. The problem most people seem to have is knowing which party in their ward has most chance of causing hurt to the Tories. Surprisingly few seem to even know which party is currently in charge.

    Voters are generally not very clever. Most have no idea who their MP is, nor which party they represent. I wonder how many have no idea whether the Govt is Tory or Labour ?
    The whole population of Brexitshire I would imagine.
    Rog, why? Why do you say such snobby, pompous shite? It's just lazy.
    Er...because he's a pompous, entitled piece of shite!
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,871

    Cookie said:

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    Change UK were hilarious. But also exciting. There was a constant drip, drip of news; it felt like - despite the permanent shambles - perhaps there could have been a realignment on the left? Perhaps Corbyn's lot could have been marginalised? Centrists I knew were hopeful. In retrospect, they were nowhere near and probably at least a year too late. But still - an enjoyable moment.

    I don't know whose situation is more unfortunate, really: the UK, where centrists have to awkwardly cohabit with the far left (or occasionally the ERG); or France, where there is a choice of either centrists, smug and aloof, or the far left or the far right.
    Here, I have a choice of at least three big(gish) parties; I may not like any of them much but all are more sane than not, and if one were to alienate me too much I have elsewhere to turn. In France, I can imagine no situation whatsoever in which I wouldn't reluctantly vote for LREM - with the result that LREM can basically do what it wants.

    Change UK wasn’t a terrible idea. It was just utterly cack handed execution. Which is a shame. I’d like a new party to come in and shake things up, but sadly given how much of a balls up CUK made I suspect it will be some time before anyone tries again.

    Also, terrible party name.
    The trouble is they picked the wrong hill to stand and die on. Being defined as the party of irreconcilables who wanted to overturn a democratic vote was never going to be the way to establish long term credentials.
    I am not sure I agree entirely. I disagree passionately with overturning the Brexit vote, but it would be foolish to say there wasn't a political market for it. I'd have probably leaned into the Euro thing and called them the European Party if I'd been advising them - to lend a stronger point of difference. I think they'd still have failed, but hey.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,217

    In St Albans I expect some Conservative gains from Lib Dems.

    Last year was an all up election due to ward boundary changes resulting in 50 Lib Dem, 4 C,1 G and 1 Independent.

    18 seats are up this year with 16 LD 1C and 1G defending.

    I suppose we may well see quite a lot of churn in the seats overall, given how different the structure of VI is now from then. Any reason you think St Albans will see LD losses other than random shuffling? Are the local council unpopular?
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    HYUFD said:

    So the Conservative voteshare average is unchanged from where it was in April 2019 and actually up from where it was in May 2019. So the NEV results for Rishi on Friday could be spun as an increase in the Tory voteshare from May 2019.

    However the Labour voteshare is up over 10% from where it was from May 2019 so still expect significant Labour gains from the Tories. The LD voteshare though is little changed and indeed actually down from where it was in May 2019, so the Tories could even gain a few seats from the LDs as might Labour

    Remember the rules. Conservatives outperform the polls and Labour underperform.

    I believe today is the day when the verdict is delivered that Gray broke the Civil Service code and she will be barred from working for a year for Labour, apparently Case wanted the ban to be substantially longer. So he's not partisan at all. No siree.

    So the PB narrative can once again be that of Rishi again crushing the hopeless, hapless Sir Softie.
    Case isn’t partisan. Vindictive, sure, but not partisan

    You missed 'ineffectual', 'supine' and 'overpromoted' too. Testament to just how far a mediocre posh Englishman can get in our society; a less compelling Kenneth Widmerpool.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 5,037
    edited May 2023
    Is this where HYUFD pops up and insists again that if you compare the General Election voting intention polls to the post-Local Election NEV calculation (rather than compare GE opinion polls to GE opinion polls to get a flavour of opinion shifting), the Lib Dems are well down whilst the Tories are level and therefore there is a guaranteed swing to the Tories from the Lib Dems and a swathe of seats will go blue from yellow?

  • TimSTimS Posts: 13,217
    One strategic option open to the Lib Dems, which they've half taken in the past (potholes etc) but never really pressed home, is to be THE party of local government. The one that really cares about local politics and issues. That needn't mean abandoning hopes of more parliamentary seats, but generally standing only in areas where there is strong council coverage and developing a policy platform that is local government focused. From a marketing standpoint (and a real power one for that matter) it would make a lot of sense.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281

    Nigelb said:

    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)

    Maybe the Bank of England should include a profit-sharing clause in the next buyout it arranges, or perhaps criterion-based like some football transfers.
    The problem there is that HSBC took a risk. Trying to nationalise profit and privatise loss is just as silly as the other way round.
    They weren't taking that great a risk, since it was wholly insulated from the US parent.
    Government missed a trick in not participating; I don't think anyone's arguing HSBC aren't entitled to profit, though.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,983

    Roger said:

    Off topic (probably), least reassuring description on eBay for a used piece of clothing ever: from a smoke free, lice free house.

    Could be a metaphor for some political marketing I guess.

    An ideal opening shot for Labour's next PPB. The one I did for the Lib Dems entitled 'Maggies Broken Britain' opened on some contrasty black and white shots of derelict high rises which I always thought were a little crude. That ad would have been much stronger
    They are the party of smoke and lice.

    No we’re not!

    Ha ha, forced to deny it, no smoke (& lice) without fire!
    Etc
    I was thinking 48 sheet posters maybe Hartlepool as the backdrop then.........

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efP2Bqm3FgE
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,714

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    The hypocrisy of Anna Soubry was quite something. She was a regular on TV berating rebellious BOO Tory MPs for not being loyal to Cameron and telling them they should be 'bashing lefties' (lovely woman) instead of attacking the leadership.

    Then when the winds changed, being loyal to the leadership and 'bashing lefties' became attacking the leadership and defecting to start a new party with the lefties.
    I see your point, but criticizing someone for not demanding total devotion to Boris or Liz Truss does, looking back, seem a tad high minded.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,177

    Nigelb said:

    Most profitable deal ever in terms of percentage return ?

    Silicon Valley Bank: HSBC says UK buyout boosted profit by $1.5bn
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65332752
    Banking giant HSBC says its profits got a $1.5bn (£1.2bn) boost from the purchase of collapsed Silicon Valley Bank's British business (SVB UK).
    Europe's biggest bank posted a pre-tax profit of $12.9bn for the three months to the end of March.
    That is more than three times the amount it made for the same time last year.
    In March, HSBC bought SVB UK for a nominal £1 ($1.25), in a deal led by the government and the Bank of England...


    (Though of course you would have needed billions in capital reserves to have been able to make the purchase.)

    Maybe the Bank of England should include a profit-sharing clause in the next buyout it arranges, or perhaps criterion-based like some football transfers.
    The problem there is that HSBC took a risk. Trying to nationalise profit and privatise loss is just as silly as the other way round.
    Sharing, not nationalising.
    In such a situation, if you say that you will take a chunk of any profits, but not a chunk of any losses, what do you think that should be called?
    This is a fairly common arrangement, I gather, even in football transfers, or as discussed on the last thread, student loans. It should in my view be spread more widely, not just to this bank takeover but also to business support loans more widely.
    With student loans, the government is taking a massive risk that the money will not be paid back. As proven to date….
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 1,550
    TimS said:

    In St Albans I expect some Conservative gains from Lib Dems.

    Last year was an all up election due to ward boundary changes resulting in 50 Lib Dem, 4 C,1 G and 1 Independent.

    18 seats are up this year with 16 LD 1C and 1G defending.

    I suppose we may well see quite a lot of churn in the seats overall, given how different the structure of VI is now from then. Any reason you think St Albans will see LD losses other than random shuffling? Are the local council unpopular?
    No the Council is fine. It is just that there was such a slaughter of solid conservative wards last year any slight dead cat bounce would result in conservative gains.


  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,281

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    The hypocrisy of Anna Soubry was quite something. She was a regular on TV berating rebellious BOO Tory MPs for not being loyal to Cameron and telling them they should be 'bashing lefties' (lovely woman) instead of attacking the leadership.

    Then when the winds changed, being loyal to the leadership and 'bashing lefties' became attacking the leadership and defecting to start a new party with the lefties.
    I see your point, but criticizing someone for not demanding total devotion to Boris or Liz Truss does, looking back, seem a tad high minded.
    High on what ?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,303
    FPT
    rcs1000 said:

    Lastly, here's the Nationwide house price to multiple of incomes:



    There's a couple of interesting things here: one is the roughly halving of house prices relative to incomes in the first half of the 90s, which set the property market up for the long boom from 1996 to 2007. Secondly, net migration to the UK was strongest between 2008 and 2016, which was a time during which price-to-earnings ratios barely budged.

    What is remarkable is that price-to-earnings ratios barely budged in the decade following the financial crisis. Compare that with Ireland:

    image
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    edited May 2023

    Is this where HYUFD pops up and insists again that if you compare the General Election voting intention polls to the post-Local Election NEV calculation (rather than compare GE opinion polls to GE opinion polls to get a flavour of opinion shifting), the Lib Dems are well down whilst the Tories are level and therefore there is a guaranteed swing to the Tories from the Lib Dems and a swathe of seats will go blue from yellow?

    You may dislike it but in councils the LDs gained in 2019 like Chelmsford or Guidlford or Waverley or South Oxfordshire or now control like Tunbridge Wells there is potential for Tory gains on current polls. My parents live in Tunbridge Wells and the local LD council is already unpopular due to parking restrictions etc. Same goes for potential Tory gains in Residents controlled areas like Uttlesford
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,968
    Seeing KC is weird. But then, the next Bond film will be the first when he's on His Majesty's Secret Service...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,981

    Seeing KC is weird. But then, the next Bond film will be the first when he's on His Majesty's Secret Service...

    The current 007 is a woman.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,260
    edited May 2023
    Re; the Lib Dems, according to La Toynbee, Surrey is about to experience a Lib Dem fiesta, if such a thing exists :

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/02/gove-hunt-beware-surrey-turf-out-tories-conservatives

    <<But here was the dream Lib Dem door-knock: a young couple with a small boy, ex-Tory voters who had voted Brexit and were now full of indignant regret, had a lot to say and out it all poured. “We were turkeys voting for Christmas,” said the father, shaking his head in disbelief. His company supplies many others struggling with Brexit fallout: “They can’t sell into the EU, takes too long, too expensive.” Why did they vote Brexit? “I wish we hadn’t,” says his wife. “I just thought, ‘We’re British, we don’t want to be pushed around.’ We had no idea how well we did out of it. Oven-ready? Boris had nothing. He just lied and lied, even to the Queen. We won’t forgive Tories.>>
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,468
    Nigelb said:

    A more reasoned rant against those responsible for the conduct of Brexit.

    Brexit murdered“moderate” Conservatism
    Now it justifies the right’s stab-in-the-back myths
    https://nickcohen.substack.com/p/brexit-murderedmoderate-conservatism
    ...For understandable, if not forgivable, psychological reasons the right has embraced denial. I do not hold with the liberal-left orthodoxy that Brexit was wholly built on the back of an enormous lie. Boris Johnson lies as easily as he breathes, of course, but a few supporters of Brexit sincerely believed they would inaugurate a national renaissance. When ministers approved a policy document in January 2022 setting out how “the government will use its new freedoms to transform the UK into the best regulated economy in the world,” they were lying to themselves before all others.

    Supporters of Brexit cannot believe in May 2023 what they believed in January 2022. But rather than admit to a mistake, the right retreats into a stab-in-the-back myth: the conspiracy theory of the defeated. Brexit was sabotaged by “anti-Brexit activist civil servants” (Dominic Raab), “a Europhile blob” (Daniel Hannan), and “ the objection and obstruction” of remainers (Jacob Rees-Mogg).

    So intoxicating is the conspiracy theory that not one leading supporter of Brexit has admitted that leaving the European Union was a mistake...


    How can they?

    For better or worse, Brexit is the thing that defines the politicians of this generation. A big binary choice one way or the other.

    To say "I thought this would be great, but it's actually gone badly"... How can you say that in public and expect to be taken seriously about anything ever again? It's career death.

    To say to yourself "This thing I strove for for years, it's harmed the country"... How can you say that and live with yourself? It requires a lot of integrity.

    And to save the arguments, this works equally whichever side of the 2016 debate people were. The most you can hope for is that your former opponents stop talking and try to change the subject.

    I've mentioned before the old physics aphorism. It's relevant here, except that science has a much stronger "if the facts change, you should change your model" than most human endeavours.

    Max Planck: A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it ...
    An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out, and that the growing generation is familiarized with the ideas from the beginning: another instance of the fact that the future lies with the youth.


    Or Science progresses one funeral at a time.

    The challenge for Team Brexit is that the young and middle aged aren't buying their vision. Not yet, anyway.

  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,081

    Cookie said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Cookie said:

    I miss Change UK.

    I saw a clip on YouTube of Anna Soubry berating Michael Gove from the opposition benches. Chris Leslie behind her. What fun they had! Formation. More people defecting to join! A barcode logo! Internal wranglings! Defections away! Another name change! And finally extinction.

    Far more fun than today's politics.
    Change UK were hilarious. But also exciting. There was a constant drip, drip of news; it felt like - despite the permanent shambles - perhaps there could have been a realignment on the left? Perhaps Corbyn's lot could have been marginalised? Centrists I knew were hopeful. In retrospect, they were nowhere near and probably at least a year too late. But still - an enjoyable moment.

    I don't know whose situation is more unfortunate, really: the UK, where centrists have to awkwardly cohabit with the far left (or occasionally the ERG); or France, where there is a choice of either centrists, smug and aloof, or the far left or the far right.
    Here, I have a choice of at least three big(gish) parties; I may not like any of them much but all are more sane than not, and if one were to alienate me too much I have elsewhere to turn. In France, I can imagine no situation whatsoever in which I wouldn't reluctantly vote for LREM - with the result that LREM can basically do what it wants.

    Change UK wasn’t a terrible idea. It was just utterly cack handed execution. Which is a shame. I’d like a new party to come in and shake things up, but sadly given how much of a balls up CUK made I suspect it will be some time before anyone tries again.

    Also, terrible party name.
    It was a really shit name which, in its amateurishness inadvertently signalled that it wasn't really a party, more a disgruntled band of exiles.

    Political parties in democracies oughtn't to grow from the top down anyway. They should've all just jumped to the LDs. I did feel for Luciana Berger though, who received an absolute torrent of hideous abuse*.

    *Esp from the Momentum dolts. I wonder what set her apart for particularly nasty treatment? It's truly a mystery.
    I think it would be better if parties could grow from the bottom up, but our system discourages that.

    They should have jumped to the LDs, but the fact that they didn't shows the nadir the LDs were in at the time.
    CUK: We need a party outside the big two!
    LDs: er...
    CUK: And we need a party which prioritises overturning the referendum!
    LDs: well as it happens...
    CUK: If only there was a party which would take this approach! What can we do?
    LDs: we're just over here...
    CUK: Can you hear something? No? OK - we'll just have to start our own party.
    LDs: Oh. Anyway, trans-toilets...
    IIRC the LibDems didn’t want them. They wanted leadership roles immediately…
    Well that does seem a little entitled. Particularly when you look at the calibre of the individuals concerned (tbf, I quite liked Anne Coffey).
This discussion has been closed.